REPORT Central Térmica de Temane Project - …...REPORT Central Térmica de Temane Project -...
166
REPORT Central Térmica de Temane Project - Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment Report Moz Power Invest, S.A. and Sasol New Energy Holdings (Pty) Ltd Submitted to: Ministry of Land, Environment and Rural Development (MITADER) Submitted by: Golder Associates (UK) Ltd Golder House Tadcaster Enterprise Park, Station Road, Tadcaster, North Yorkshire, LS24 9JF, UK +44 0 1937 837800 18103533-321152-20 April 2019
Transcript of REPORT Central Térmica de Temane Project - …...REPORT Central Térmica de Temane Project -...
REPORT
Central Térmica de Temane Project - Cultural Heritage
Impact Assessment Report
Moz Power Invest, S.A. and Sasol New Energy Holdings (Pty) Ltd
Submitted to:
Ministry of Land, Environment and Rural Development (MITADER)
Submitted by:
Golder Associates (UK) Ltd
Golder House Tadcaster Enterprise Park, Station Road,
Tadcaster, North Yorkshire, LS24 9JF, UK
+44 0 1937 837800
18103533-321152-20
April 2019
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
i
Distribution List 1 x electronic copy World Bank Group
1 x electronic copy SNE, EDM and TEC
1 x electronic copy e-projects library [email protected]
1 x electronic copy Golder project folder
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
ii
Executive Summary
This specialist report presents the cultural heritage baseline and impact assessment study for the proposed
CTT project, located in Inhassoro District, and southern Mozambique. Baseline data gathering was undertaken
in January 2015 and June 2018, encompassing the proposed power plant site, new transport routes, the beach
landing options, the transmission line, the associated gas/water pipeline and ten villages within c 2.5 km of these
footprints. The baseline was supplemented by baseline information gathered by Golder Associates and Rrequal
Ltd & Ancient Ltd for Sasol’s PSA and LPG Project during May 2014.
The study has been undertaken in accordance with national Mozambican legislation and in alignment with
international guidelines (World Bank Group Performance Standards).
The study of cultural heritage encompasses all elements as defined by Mozambican law including: archaeology,
historic sites, graves and sacred places as well as related traditional practices and immaterial (intangible)
heritage. Although there are no statutory protected sites within the study area, project-related disturbance has
the potential to permanently remove unique cultural heritage features protected by Mozambican law.
Baseline data gathering undertaken in 2015 identified 36 potentially significant cultural heritage sites within the
study area (plus 10 outside), primarily comprising archaeological surface scatters of Iron Age date, suggestive
of seasonal hunting/fishing activity, and cultural sites, including graves and religious or locally sacred places.
An additional seven cultural sites (burials, cemeteries and churches) were identified within the study area in
2018. A total of 44 sites from the 2014 survey were also recorded in the study area of the CTT project. A total
of 87sites were therefore identified within the study area.
During construction there is potential, in the worst-case scenario and without mitigation, for high significance
impacts on cultural heritage receptors (both archaeological and cultural) as a result of changes to land surface.
With mitigation, in the form of a Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP; including a specific Chance Finds
Procedure (CFP)), potential impacts on archaeological sites are reduced to low significance impacts. Selection
of the preferred northern access transport route and sensitive re-alignment of the electricity transmission route
will avoid impacts to known cultural sites. A potential moderate significance impact on intangible cultural
heritage is predicted (without mitigation) during construction as a result of demographic changes, in particular
influx of construction workers. This will be mitigated through the CHMP.
During operations, a moderate significance impact is anticipated at burial sites along the proposed electricity
transmission route, without mitigation, as a result of changes in environmental setting (from noise and visual
intrusion). This will be mitigated through sensitive re-alignment of the proposed transmission line.
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
iii
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 1
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE KEY PROJECT COMPONENTS ........................................................................ 3
2.1 Ancillary Infrastructure ...................................................................................................................... 5
2.2 Water and electricity consumption .................................................................................................... 7
2.3 Temporary Beach Landing Site and Transportation Route Alternative ............................................ 7
3.0 POLICY, LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK ..................................................................... 10
3.1 Mozambique Legislation ................................................................................................................. 10
3.1.1 Statutory Protected Features in Mozambique ............................................................................ 12
3.2 International Guidance .................................................................................................................... 12
3.2.1 World Bank Group Performance Standards ............................................................................... 12
3.2.2 The Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage .................................. 12
4.0 BASELINE CONDITIONS ......................................................................................................................... 12
4.1 Scope of study................................................................................................................................. 12
4.2 Study methodology ......................................................................................................................... 15
4.2.1 Desktop review of available information ..................................................................................... 16
4.2.2 Field study method ...................................................................................................................... 16
4.2.3 Cultural heritage community consultation methodology ............................................................. 17
4.2.4 Limitations ................................................................................................................................... 17
4.3 Results and Findings ....................................................................................................................... 18
4.3.1 Literature Review ........................................................................................................................ 18
4.3.1.1 Archaeology of the South Eastern African region/Mozambique ................................................. 18
4.3.1.2 Archaeology of Central Mozambique .......................................................................................... 19
4.3.1.3 Prior Investigations...................................................................................................................... 20
4.3.2 Archaeological Field Survey ....................................................................................................... 21
4.3.2.1 Archaeological Remains ............................................................................................................. 21
4.3.2.2 Archaeological Summary ............................................................................................................ 26
4.3.3 Community Consultation and Cultural Survey ............................................................................ 30
4.3.3.1 Settlement History and Oral History ............................................................................................ 30
4.3.3.2 Cemeteries and Burials ............................................................................................................... 30
4.3.3.3 Churches and Mosques .............................................................................................................. 31
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
iv
4.3.3.4 Sacred Places ............................................................................................................................. 31
4.3.3.5 Intangible cultural heritage .......................................................................................................... 39
4.3.3.6 Cultural Site Summary ................................................................................................................ 41
4.4 Cultural Heritage Site Valuation ...................................................................................................... 44
4.4.1 Archaeological Site Valuation ..................................................................................................... 44
4.4.2 Cultural Site ................................................................................................................................. 44
5.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT ........................................................................................................................... 54
5.1 Assessment methodology and rating criteria .................................................................................. 54
5.2 Identified impacts ............................................................................................................................ 57
5.2.1 Construction phase impacts ........................................................................................................ 57
5.2.2 Operational phase impacts ......................................................................................................... 61
5.2.3 Decommissioning phase impacts ............................................................................................... 62
6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PLAN ......................................................................................................... 62
7.0 CONCLUSIONS ........................................................................................................................................ 63
8.0 SPECIALIST RECOMMENDATION ......................................................................................................... 63
9.0 GLOSSARY .............................................................................................................................................. 63
10.0 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................................... 64
TABLES
Table 1: Prehistoric chronology in Southern Africa ............................................................................................ 19
Table 2: Well documented cultural heritage investigations in wider area .......................................................... 20
Table 3: Archaeological sites with the Study Area identified during 2015 field survey ...................................... 25
Table 4: Cultural sites identified during community consultation (2015 and 2018) ............................................ 34
Table 5: Centres of traditional medicine identified during 2015 community consultation .................................. 40
Table 6: Cultural Heritage Site Valuation Summary ........................................................................................... 45
Table 7: Scoring system for evaluating impacts ................................................................................................. 55
Table 8: Impact significance rating ..................................................................................................................... 55
Table 9: Types of impact .................................................................................................................................... 56
Table 10: Potential construction phase impacts to cultural heritage .................................................................. 57
Table 11: Impact assessment table – construction phase ................................................................................. 61
Table 12: Impact assessment table – operation phase ...................................................................................... 62
Table 13: Environmental Action Plan ................................................................................................................. 62
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
v
FIGURES
Figure 1: Project Location ..................................................................................................................................... 3
Figure 2: Examples of gas to power plant sites (source: www.industcards.com and www.wartsila.com) ........... 4
Figure 3: Conceptual layout of CTT plant site ...................................................................................................... 5
Figure 4: Typical beach landing site with barge offloading heavy equipment (source: Comarco) ....................... 6
Figure 5: Example of large equipment being offloaded from a barge. Note the levels of the ramp, the barge and the jetty (source: SUBTECH) ................................................................................................................................ 6
Figure 6: Heavy haulage truck with 16-axle hydraulic trailer transporting a 360 ton generator (source: ALE) .... 7
Figure 7: The three beach landing site options and route options at Inhassoro .................................................. 8
Figure 8: The two main transportation route alternatives from the beach landing sites to the CTT site .............. 9
Figure 9: Cultural Heritage study area ................................................................................................................ 14
Figure 10: Surface scatter at Site AR-109 (Adamowicz, 2015) .......................................................................... 21
Figure 11: Early Iron Age pottery artefact recorded from Site AR-111 (Adamowicz, 2015) .............................. 22
Figure 12: Pottery from Site AR-103 (Adamowicz, 2015) .................................................................................. 22
Figure 13: Pottery from Site AR-105 (Adamowicz, 2015) .................................................................................. 23
Figure 14: Pottery scatter at Site AR-110 (Adamowicz, 2015) ........................................................................... 23
Figure 15: Site AR-112 (Adamowicz, 2015) ....................................................................................................... 24
Figure 16: Shell midden deposit at AR-114 (Adamowicz, 2015) ........................................................................ 24
Figure 17: Pottery recorded at Site AR-115 (Adamowicz, 2015) ....................................................................... 25
Figure 18: Archaeological sites identified by baseline study .............................................................................. 28
Figure 19: Archaeological sites within study area .............................................................................................. 29
Figure 20: Church of St Ana, on EN1 south of Maimelane (Adamowicz, 2015) ................................................ 31
Figure 21: Site SP-107 sacred place near Chipongo village (Adamowicz, 2015) .............................................. 32
Figure 22: Site SP-103 place for male circumcision (Adamowicz, 2015) ........................................................... 33
Figure 23: Site SP-105 sacred place (Adamowicz, 2015) .................................................................................. 33
Figure 24: Entrance to site SP-107 (Adamowicz, 2015) .................................................................................... 34
Figure 25: Produce at clinic MP-101 (Adamowicz, 2015) .................................................................................. 40
Figure 26: Cultural sites identified by baseline study ......................................................................................... 42
Figure 27: Cultural sites within study area.......................................................................................................... 43
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A Patrimoz Serviços de Consultoria Field Notes
APPENDIX B Gazetteer of all sites
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
vi
ACRONYMS / ABBREVIATIONS
Acronym or Abbreviation Full Term
AD Anno Domini
ARPAC Arquivo do Património Cultural [National Institute for Socio-Cultural Heritage]
BC Before Christ
CPF Central Processing Facility
CTT Central Térmica de Temane
CTRG Central Térmica de Ressano Garcia
CFP Chance Find Procedure
CHMP Cultural Heritage Management Plan
DNPC Direcção Nacional do Património Cultural [National Directorate of Cultural
Heritage]
EDM Electricidade de Mozambique E.P.
EIS Environmental Impact Study
ESIA Environmental and Social Impact Assessment
EMP Environmental Management Plan
ENH Empresa Nacional de Hidrocarbonetos [National Oil Company of
Mozambique]
EPDA Environmental Pre-feasibility Studies and Scope Definition
GA Gabinete de Arqueologia [National Archaeology Department]
GPS Global Positioning System
ha hectare
IFC International Finance Corporation
KV Kilovolt
LNG Liquefied Natural Gas
LPG Liquefied Petroleum Gas
MW Megawatt
Mya Million Years Ago
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
vii
Acronym or Abbreviation Full Term
PSA Production Sharing Agreement
SNE Sasol New Energy Holdings (Pty) Ltd
TEC Temane Energy Consortium (Pty) Ltd
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Mozambican economy is one of the fastest growing economies on the African continent with electricity
demand increasing by approximately 6-8% annually. In order to address the growing electricity demand faced
by Mozambique and to improve power quality, grid stability and flexibility in the system, Moz Power Invest, S.A.
(MPI), a company to be incorporated under the laws of Mozambique and Sasol New Energy Holdings (Pty) Ltd
(SNE) in a joint development agreement is proposing the construction and operation of a gas to power facility,
known as the Central Térmica de Temane (CTT) project. MPI’s shareholding will be comprised of EDM and
Temane Energy Consortium (Pty) Ltd (TEC). The joint development partners of MPI and SNE will hereafter be
referred to as the Proponent. The Proponent propose to develop the CTT, a 450MW natural gas fired power
plant.
The proposed CTT project will draw gas from either the Sasol Exploration and Production International (SEPI)
gas well field via the phase 1 development of the PSA License area, covering gas deposits in the Temane and
Pande well fields in the Inhassoro District and the existing Central Processing Facility (CPF) or from an
alternative gas source. Consequently, the CTT site is in close proximity to the CPF. The preferred location for
the CTT is approximately 500 m south of the CPF. The CPF, and the proposed site of the CTT project, is located
in the Temane/Mangugumete area, Inhassoro District, Inhambane Province, Mozambique; and approximately
40 km northwest of the town of Vilanculos. The Govuro River lies 8 km east of the proposed CTT site. The
estimated footprint of the CTT power plant is approximately 20 ha (see Figure 1).
Associated infrastructure and facilities for the CTT project will include:
1) Electricity transmission line (400 KV) and servitude; from the proposed power plant to the proposed
Vilanculos substation over a total length of 25 km running generally south to a future Vilanculos substation.
[Note: the development of the substation falls outside the battery limits of the project scope as it is part of
independent infrastructure authorised separately. Environmental authorisation for this substation was
obtained under the STE/CESUL project. (MICOA Ref: 75/MICOA/12 of 22nd May)];
2) Piped water from one or more borehole(s) located either on site at the power plant or from a borehole
located on the eastern bank of the Govuro River (this option will require a water pipeline approximately
11km in length);
3) Access road; over a total length of 3 km, which will follow the proposed water pipeline to the northeast of
the CTT to connect to the existing Temane CPF access road;
4) Gas pipeline and servitude; over a total length of 2 km, which will start from the CPF high pressure
compressor and run south on the western side of the CPF to connect to the power plant or from an
alternative gas source;
5) Additional nominal widening of the servitude for vehicle turning points at points to be identified along these
linear servitudes;
6) A construction camp and contractor laydown areas will be established adjacent to the CTT power plant
footprint; and
7) Transhipment and barging of equipment to a temporary beach landing site and associated logistics camp
and laydown area for the purposes of safe handling and delivery of large oversized and heavy equipment
and infrastructure to build the CTT. The transhipment consists of a vessel anchoring for only approximately
1-2 days with periods of up to 3-4 months between shipments over a maximum 15 month period early in
the construction phase, in order to offload heavy materials to a barge for beach landing. There are 3 beach
landing site options, namely SETA, Maritima and Briza Mar (Figure 7). The SETA site is considered to be
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
2
the preferred beach landing site for environmental and other reasons; it therefore shall be selected unless
it is found to be not feasible for any reason;
8) Temporary bridges and access roads or upgrading and reinforcement of existing bridges and roads across
sections of the Govuro River where existing bridges are not able to bear the weight of the equipment loads
that need to be transported from the beach landing site to the CTT site. Some new sections of road may
need to be developed where existing roads are inaccessible or inadequate to allow for the safe transport
of equipment to the CTT site. The northern transport route via R241 and EN1 is considered as the preferred
transport route (Figure 8) on terrestrial impacts; however, until the final anchor point is selected, and the
barge route confirmed, the marine factors may still have an impact on which is deemed the overall
preferable route.
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
3
Figure 1: Project Location
2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE KEY PROJECT COMPONENTS
The CTT project will produce electricity from natural gas in a power plant located 500m south of the CPF. The
project will consist of the construction and operation of the following main components:
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
4
Gas to Power Plant with generation capacity of 450MW;
Gas pipeline (±2 km) that will feed the Power Plant with natural gas from the CPF or from an alternative
gas source;
400kV Electrical transmission line (± 25 km) with a servitude that will include a fire break (vegetation
control) and a maintenance road to the Vilanculos sub-station. The transmission line will have a partial
protection zone (PPZ) of 100m width. The transmission line servitude will fall inside the PPZ;
Water supply pipeline to a borehole located either on site or at borehole located east of the Govuro
River;
Surfaced access road to the CTT site and gravel maintenance roads within the transmission line and
pipeline servitudes;
Temporary beach landing structures at Inhassoro town for the purposes of delivery of heavy and
oversized equipment and infrastructure to build the power plant. This will include transhipment and
barging activities to bring equipment to the beach landing site for approximately 1-2 days with up to 3-4
months between shipments over a period of approximately 8-15 months;
Construction camp and contractor laydown areas adjacent to the CTT power plant site; and
Temporary bridge structures across Govuro River and tributaries, as well possible new roads and/or road
upgrades to allow equipment to be safely transported to site during construction.
Figure 2: Examples of gas to power plant sites (source: www.industcards.com and www.wartsila.com)
The final selection of technology that will form part of the power generation component of the CTT project has
not been determined at this stage. The two power generation technology options that are currently being
evaluated are:
Combined Cycle Gas Turbine (CCGT); and
Open Cycle Gas Engines (OCGE).
Please refer to Chapter 4 of the main ESIA document for further details on the technology option.
At this early stage in the project a provisional layout of infrastructure footprints, including the proposed linear
alignments are indicated in Figure 1. A conceptual layout of the CTT plant site is shown below in Figure 3.
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
5
Figure 3: Conceptual layout of CTT plant site
2.1 Ancillary Infrastructure
The CTT project will also include the following infrastructure:
Maintenance facilities, admin building and other buildings;
Telecommunications and security;
Waste (solid and effluent) treatment and/or handling and disposal by third party;
Site preparation, civil works and infrastructure development for the complete plant;
Construction camp (including housing/accommodation for construction workers); and
Beach landing laydown area and logistics camp.
The heavy equipment and pre-fabricated components of the power plant will be brought in by ship and
transferred by barge and landed on the beach near Inhassoro. The equipment and components will be brought
to site by special heavy vehicles capable of handling abnormally heavy and large dimension loads. Figure 4,
Figure 5 and Figure 6 show examples of the activities involved with a temporary beach landing site, offloading
and transporting of large heavy equipment by road to site.
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
6
Figure 4: Typical beach landing site with barge offloading heavy equipment (source: Comarco)
Figure 5: Example of large equipment being offloaded from a barge. Note the levels of the ramp, the barge and the jetty (source: SUBTECH)
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
7
Figure 6: Heavy haulage truck with 16-axle hydraulic trailer transporting a 360 ton generator (source: ALE)
2.2 Water and electricity consumption
The type, origin and quantity of water and energy consumption are still to be determined based on the selected
technology to construct and operate the CTT plant. At this stage it is known that water will be sourced from
existing boreholes located on site or east of the Govuro River for either of the technology options below:
Gas Engine: ± 12 m3/day; or
Gas Turbine (Dry-Cooling): ± 120 – 240 m3/day.
2.3 Temporary Beach Landing Site and Transportation Route Alternative
As part of the CTT construction phase it was considered that large heavy equipment and materials would need
to be brought in by a ship which would remain anchored at sea off the coast of Inhassoro. Equipment and
materials would be transferred to a barge capable of moving on the high tide into very shallow water adjacent
to the beach to discharge its cargo onto a temporary off-loading jetty (typically containers filled with sand) near
the town of Inhassoro. As the tide changes, the barge rests on the beach and off-loading of the equipment
commences.
Currently, the SETA beach landing site is the preferred beach landing site together with the road route option
to be used in transporting equipment and materials along the R241 then the EN1 then via the existing CPF
access road to the CTT site near the CPF. Figure 7 and Figure 8 indicate the beach landing site and route
transportation option. The alternative beach landing sites of Maritima and Briza Mar are still being evaluated
as potential options, as well as the southern transport route, which would also require road upgrades and a
temporary bridge construction across the Govuro at the position of the existing pipe bridge. As part of the
transportation route, the Grovuro River bridge may need to be upgraded / strengthened to accommodate the
abnormal vehicle loads. Alternatively, a temporary bypass bridge will be constructed adjacent to the existing
bridge.
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
8
Figure 7: The three beach landing site options and route options at Inhassoro
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
9
Figure 8: The two main transportation route alternatives from the beach landing sites to the CTT site
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
10
3.0 POLICY, LEGAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE FRAMEWORK
3.1 Mozambique Legislation
The proposed project has been determined as ‘Category A’ in terms of Mozambique’s environmental law
(Decree 54/2015 of 31 December, which has been in force since April 2016). For ‘Category A’ projects, an
Environmental and Social Impact Assessment (ESIA) must be prepared by independent consultants as a basis
for whether or not environmental authorisation of the project is to be granted, and if so, under what conditions.
The final decision maker is the Ministry of Land, Environment and Rural Development (Ministério da Terra,
Ambiente e Desenvolvimento Rural (MITADER) through the National Directorate of Environmental Impact
Assessment (DNAIA). MITADER consults with other relevant government departments prior to making a
decision.
This document represents the Cultural Heritage Impact Assessment undertaken to support the ESIA. The
following national legislative instruments are applicable to this impact assessment:
Environmental Law (Decree 20/1997 of 1 October);
Decree 54/2015 of 31 December, approving the Regulation on the Process for the Environmental Impact
Assessment (EIA);
Law 10/1988, of 22 December, Law on the Protection of Cultural Heritage, which specifies the legal
protection of all ‘material and immaterial’ assets of the Mozambican cultural heritage (10/1988);
Decree 27/1994, of 20 July, Archaeological Heritage Protection Regulations;
Decree 24/2004 Regulations on Petroleum Operations;
Decree 56/2010 of 22 November on Petroleum Operations;
Land Law (Law 19/1997 of 1 October) and Land Law Regulations (Decree 66/1998);
Law no. 13/2009, of 25 February, which establishes the system for the protection of the Assets pertaining
to the National Liberation Struggle;
Law 10/1999 on the Protection of Forests and Wildlife (Decree 12/2002);
Resolution 11/2010, which approves policy applicable to Museums;
Resolution 12/2010, which approves policy applicable to Monuments;
Resolution 17/1982 Approves the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural
Heritage, BR no. 44, I Serie, 13/11/82.
The Law on the Protection of Cultural Heritage (1988) is implemented by the Ministry of Culture through the
National Board of Cultural Heritage. The National Board of Cultural Heritage is the primary advisory body on
heritage in Mozambique and is composed primarily of representatives of relevant institutions and independent
experts.
The Law on the Protection of Cultural Heritage (1988) was established to ensure the legal protection of material
and immaterial assets of Mozambican cultural heritage. For the purposes of the law, Cultural Heritage is defined
as “the set of material and immaterial assets created or integrated by the Mozambican people throughout
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
11
history, with relevance to the definition of the Mozambican cultural identity” 1. The law qualifies all cultural
heritage assets discovered in Mozambican territory as State property.
Article 10 of The Law on the Protection of Cultural Heritage (1988) outlines the cultural heritage assets that are
considered as inalienable property of the State, namely, archaeological localities and objects, rock paintings,
and buildings or other structures that are representative of the pre-colonial societies, such as stone walls,
“zimbabwes”, “aringas”, mining centres and centres of power, population settlements, trading hubs and worship
sites. Localities with special ecological characteristics are also included in the list of cultural assets (Article
3.4.c). Article 13 defines that, in the event of discovery of any places, buildings, objects or documents
susceptible of being classified as cultural heritage assets, the closest administrative authorities must be
informed. It states that “Any archaeological works or the opening of caves, rock shelters and geological
formations for the purpose of carrying out anthropological or paleontological research is subject to prior
authorisation by the relevant authorities”.
In 2010 two new policies were approved (Resolução Nr. 11, 2010 and Resolução Nr. 12, 2010). The Museum
Policy and the Monument Policy are complementary to each other, defining the management of archaeological
monuments and associated elements.
Furthermore, The Law on the Protection of Forests and Wildlife (Decree 12/2002), makes provision for the
existence of ‘Zones of Use’ and of ‘Historical-Cultural Value’, for purposes of protecting forests with a religious
interest and other sites of historical importance and cultural use, in line with the traditional norms and practices
of the various communities.
The Proponent has specific legal responsibilities in the event that features of archaeological significance are
recovered on the project site. In summary, The Archaeological Assets Protection Regulations (27/94), which
apply to both “immoveable” and “moveable” assets, require the finder of any accidental archaeological elements
(through prospecting and/or excavation) to communicate this finding within 48 hours to the local authority. The
Archaeological Assets Protection Regulations also state that, in the event that the discovery occurs during any
project-related activity, the Proponent will be responsible for all expenses required to protect and safeguard any
archaeological findings, as determined by the relevant authorities.
The Archaeological Assets Protection Regulations sets out the following (Articles 3 and 4):
“It is forbidden to carry out archaeological excavations and surveys without a certifying license issued by
the relevant authority”; and
“Authorisation and issuing of licenses for archaeological works are the prerogative of the National Board
for Cultural Heritage and museums and other public national bodies indicated by the Ministry of Culture
which include in their working programs research and protection of the archaeological heritage”
Furthermore, the Archaeological Assets Protection Regulations establish that “Licenses shall be granted only
to applicants with a proven scientific background…trained archaeologists with proven experience in the area
and who must be registered in the Ministry of Culture through the National Board for Cultural Heritage”.
The Archaeological Assets Protection Regulations state that any project involving excavation and/or large scale
earth-moving, must involve preliminary prospecting for cultural heritage assets under threat (to initiate salvage,
as necessary). Provisions must also be made, as a budget line item, to cover cultural heritage requirements,
at no less than 0.5% of the total project cost (Archaeological Assets Protection Regulations (27/94)).
1 The Law on Protection of Cultural Heritage, Article 10, 1988
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
12
3.1.1 Statutory Protected Features in Mozambique
There are a number of cultural heritage sites recorded on the National Archaeological Database in Mozambique
(i.e. sites protected by the National Board of Cultural Heritage). As of December 2014, these include seven
industrial sites; 27 rock art sites; 87 Stone Age sites; 128 sacred sites; 205 historical sites; 371 Early Iron Age
Sites; and 451 Late Iron Age Sites.
No statutory protected features exist within the immediate project vicinity. There are five protected sites in the
wider area (within the Vilanculos and Govuro Districts) these are well beyond the study area for cultural
heritage2: Mambone (AR-101); Chibuene (AR-106); Nhachengue (AR-107) (which is under temporary
protection); Nhanimela 1 (AR-108); and Manyikene (AR-113). These sites are discussed further in Section 4.0,
and a gazetteer of all sites is included in Appendix B.
3.2 International Guidance
This impact assessment has also been undertaken in accordance with World Bank Group operational policies
and general environmental health and safety guidelines. In particular, the World Bank Group Performance
Standards (OP 4.03) have been considered and incorporated throughout this assessment.
3.2.1 World Bank Group Performance Standards
The most pertinent Performance Standard (PS) is PS 8: Cultural Heritage (2012). PS 8 defines cultural heritage
as “(i) tangible forms of cultural heritage, such as tangible moveable or immovable objects, property, sites,
structures, or groups of structures, having archaeological (prehistoric), paleontological, historical, cultural,
artistic, and religious values; (ii) unique natural features or tangible objects that embody cultural values, such
as sacred groves, rocks, lakes, and waterfalls; and (iii) certain instances of intangible forms of culture that are
proposed to be used for commercial purposes, such as cultural knowledge, innovations, and practices of
communities embodying traditional lifestyles”. The PS requires the investor to identify and reduce or avoid
adverse impacts upon cultural heritage resources. The PS provides guidance which specifies the participation
of affected communities in the identification of, and potential mitigation of, cultural heritage resources
recommending appropriate strategies for impact reduction and long-term cultural heritage management (e.g.
implementation of a Cultural Heritage Management Plan and a Chance Find Procedure).
3.2.2 The Convention for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage
Mozambique has been a signatory to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation’s
(UNESCO’s) Convention for the Safeguarding of Intangible Cultural Heritage since 2007. The Convention
seeks to raise awareness of threats to intangible heritage and encourages member states in the identification,
protection and management of such assets, ensuring respect for those individuals and communities concerned.
4.0 BASELINE CONDITIONS
4.1 Scope of study
The purpose and scope of this specialist study was to collect scientifically defendable, high quality data of
sufficient breadth that could be used to characterise the baseline cultural heritage environment in the area that
may be potentially be affected by the CCT project, in particular the Inhassoro and Vilanculos Districts,
Inhambane Province, southern Mozambique. The baseline conditions have been used to undertake an
assessment of the CCT project’s potential impact upon cultural heritage.
The study area for the baseline study was defined as the land likely to be directly impacted by, and immediately
adjacent to, the proposed project components, as depicted in Figure 9. The wider area (i.e. Inhassoro and
2 All identified archaeological sites included in the baseline study have been given a Site ID with the pre-fixed “AR”
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
13
Vilanculos Districts) surrounding the development was incorporated as appropriate, in order to adequately
assess the potential for cultural heritage receptors to exist in this area and to provide context for those sites
identified within the immediate vicinity.
The study area includes:
Beach landing options and lay down areas in the vicinity of Inhassaro;
Transport routes to the CTT power plant site from the beach landing options (including 20 m buffer);
Proposed power plant Site;
Transmission line route;
Gas/Water pipeline route over the Govuro River (including 20 m buffer); and
The settlements within close proximity (<2.5 km) to the project, comprising Inhassoro, Maimelane, Litlau,
Mangugumete, Mangarelane, Mapanzene, Mabime and Manusse.
The project components and survey locations are depicted on the study area map, Figure 9.
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
14
Figure 9: Cultural Heritage study area
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
15
The cultural heritage assessment has been undertaken in accordance with World Bank Group PS 8: Cultural
Heritage (2012), which seeks to protect cultural heritage from the adverse impacts of project activities, support
its preservation and promote the equitable sharing of benefits from the use of cultural heritage. With reference
to the definitions of cultural heritage detailed in PS 8 (as presented in Section 3.2.1) and the Mozambican Law
on the Protection of Cultural Heritage 10/88 (1998) (as presented in Section 3.1) the assets that were considered
in collation of the baseline environment comprise:
Archaeological sites and artefacts;
Historic structures and districts;
Palaeontological sites;
Cultural landscapes;
Cultural or religious sites; and
Intangible heritage practice.
The baseline scope of work for cultural heritage consequently included:
A detailed cultural heritage survey, covering the full range of cultural heritage assets (as defined above),
comprising both desk study and field survey;
Recording, by means of written, photographic, aural and GPS records, of each identified tangible site
and/or artefact to allow the location, scale, form, function, date and relative importance of each to be
ascertained; and
Recording, by means of written, aural and photographic evidence, elements of unique and intangible
cultural heritage practice related to a) tangible sacred sites and b) the communities local to the project.
For each cultural heritage asset identified, an assessment of its value has been made (Section 4.4). All sites
identified are summarised in the cultural heritage gazetteer (Appendix B).
The impact assessment includes an assessment of both direct and indirect impacts to identified cultural heritage
receptors and, where relevant, their setting. Impacts have been assessed for the construction, operation and
decommissioning phases of the development. Where impacts have been identified, a mitigation strategy has
been developed, and the residual impact quantified (Section 4.0)
4.2 Study methodology
The baseline study initiated with a work plan that was prepared to set out the proposed methodology for cultural
heritage baseline data collection (Golder Associates, 2013). This determined a three staged approach to
identifying, recording, and assessing cultural heritage assets that were likely to be affected by the project,
comprising:
i) A desk study and literature review of existing cultural heritage information pertinent to the project area;
ii) A targeted field reconnaissance survey to capture sites and features of archaeological and historic interest;
and
iii) Community consultation survey to capture sites and elements of local cultural and religious activities,
including intangible cultural heritage.
Baseline data for the CTT project has been gathered in two phases of survey, in 2015 and 2018. The January
2015 survey primarily focused on identifying and recording both visible, tangible cultural heritage resources and
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
16
any associated intangible practices within the defined study area (Section 4.1). In adherence with Mozambican
law, the on-site work was completed by locally licenced cultural heritage experts - Professor Leonardo
Adamowicz of Patrimoz - Consultores (Cultural Heritage Services), assisted by Ercídio Jaime Jeremias Nhatule
- under the appropriate license (No. DNPC 5/2014), managed by Golder Associates who provided the Work
Plan for study. The local experts are familiar with the archaeology, culture and language of the region.
Following this first survey, a decision was made to temporarily postpone the impact assessment. The project
has now been resumed by the Proponent and a second survey conducted in June 2018 to confirm if the baseline
conditions remained the same as in 2015 and to record any new sites not captured by the initial survey.
Furthermore, a baseline cultural heritage survey undertaken on behalf of Sasol for a different project in the same
region in 2014 (the PSA and LPG ESIA Project) has also been incorporated into this study to supplement the
baseline dataset and enable greater understanding of the local cultural environment. The 2014 archaeological
survey was undertaken by local heritage experts from Rrequal Ltd and Ancient Ltd, managed by Golder
Associates, whilst Golder’s Community and Environmental Team provided complementary data on cultural sites
and intangible heritage.
4.2.1 Desktop review of available information
The literature review included examination of the existing dataset on Mozambican heritage, focusing on the
Inhambane province in particular. It sought to identify archaeological, paleontological and historical sites
previously recorded within, and adjacent to, the study area. This review included a search of the list of
monuments protected by the National Board of Cultural Heritage; the District Board of Cultural Heritage; and
the Circle of Interest of Cultural Heritage. It specifically targeted appropriate libraries and archives at the
University Eduardo Mondlane in Maputo as well as unpublished papers, records, archival and historical
documents through public libraries and other archives. A review of available mapping and previous relevant
survey was also undertaken to further establish areas of high potential (e.g. favourable for ancient settlement)
which would be targeted by the archaeological field survey team.
4.2.2 Field study method
The field survey completed for the study comprised the archaeological team walking over targeted areas looking
for visible surface material (e.g., pottery sherds, stone tools, slag) and any structural remains (e.g., historic
buildings, evidence of past settlement). Areas of the project’s proposed development were targeted, as well as
those of archaeological potential, as previously identified during the desk study phase (and earlier relevant
reconnaissance missions – e.g. 2015 survey results informed the 2018 survey). Vehicle access to drop off
points was afforded by existing roads and trails, after which the team surveyed on foot. Following the
identification and recording of a site, the team spent more time in the vicinity to check for the presence of
additional sites.
A hand-held GPS was used to navigate and record the routes taken. The GPS points and routes were
downloaded to a computer, together with digital photographic images and videos. Each archaeological site was
given a unique identifier (e.g. prefixed by ‘AR’ for archaeology) and its GPS co-ordinates were recorded
(longitude and latitude or UTM). The field notes made by Patrimoz - Consultores are presented in Appendix A,
whilst a full list of sites is presented in the cultural heritage gazetteer (Appendix B).
This work was carried out with adherence to the guidelines set out in Law 10/1988 of 22 December, which
prescribes the legal protection of all material and immaterial assets of the Mozambican cultural heritage and
under license No. DNPC 5/2014. There was no intention to undertake any below-ground investigations,
although limited manual clearance of vegetation was necessary in places. It was beyond the scope of this
survey to remove surface objects en masse from sites; this will be undertaken during further stages of work, if
necessary. The archaeological team retained small representative samples of pottery sherds (x32 in total) for
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
17
detailed recording and photography. These were drawn and photographed then deposited with the District
Board of Cultural Heritage.
4.2.3 Cultural heritage community consultation methodology
The cultural heritage community consultations for the CTT project were completed in conjunction with the
archaeological field surveys in 2015 and 2018. Key Informants were identified in ten villages within the study
area, comprising Vulanjane, Malmelane, Mangugumete, Manusse, Chipango, Mangarelane I, Mangarelane II,
Guvuro, Inhassaro and Mabime. Key Informants were elder members of the community, often village leaders,
selected for their knowledge of local traditions and sites, and their willingness to share with the survey team.
One to one interviews were held (in the appropriate local dialect e.g. Xitswa) in order to ascertain the likelihood
for places of religious and cultural importance to occur.
Where possible, these areas were sensitively mapped and recorded with the approval of the local community.
Each cultural site was given a unique identifier and the relevant GPS co-ordinates were recorded (longitude and
latitude). Notes were taken with regard to any related intangible heritage practices e.g. rules/taboos that may
govern certain spaces. The field notes made by Patrimoz - Consultores are presented in Appendix A, whilst a
full list of sites is presented in the cultural heritage gazetteer (Appendix B).
4.2.4 Limitations
The extent of the cultural heritage study area was defined in consideration of the breadth of the project footprint.
Any subsequent design changes and/or alterations may require new surveys to be conducted (e.g. if the
proposed infrastructure layout is changed substantially).
The site work and the survey coverage were, in parts, subject to the constraints imposed by:
Health and safety considerations (including the presence of landmines, poisonous snakes);
Adverse weather;
Poor ground visibility (bush cover); and
Inaccessibility (dense vegetation, flooding, remoteness).
These constraints are typical of baseline field data collection and as a whole did not negatively impact on the
objectives of the survey. Gaining site access in particularly rural areas of dense vegetation was a considerable
issue and it should be noted that there remains a limited potential for (as yet unrecorded) features of
archaeological interest across the study area. For example, there were a number of sites known locally through
oral tradition (particularly sacred sites) which were located in very remote areas, within the study area but
seemingly well beyond the proposed infrastructure locations.
It should also be reiterated that the archaeological survey comprised ground inspection only, no intrusive, below-
ground, activity was undertaken, and those sites identified during the baseline field survey include only those
readily visible on the surface i.e. as indicated by artefactual material. It is possible therefore that other, more
significant remains may survive in sub-surface deposits, or in areas inaccessible at the time of survey.
A number of sacred sites identified by the community were also relatively indistinct and unidentifiable without
local guidance. In these instances, it was noted that members of the community struggled to identify particular
‘sites’ associated with oral history, these places are indicated through spiritual means and seen as important,
intangible, local assets. Consequently, there was found to be a strong relationship between oral history and
specific areas despite the fact that the definition or ‘boundaries’ of that ‘place’ may be hard to define or are
ephemeral. The importance of oral history within the study area has also meant that written records are
fragmentary or not commonly kept (e.g. in relation to settlement history).
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
18
The information gathered in relation to traditional cultural places and intangible heritage is also limited to that
which the community was willing to share with the field team. Although the sites recorded were not considered
to be ‘secret’, and access was freely granted, there may be places known only to a small section of the
community and/or some which are too sensitive to share. This probability is emphasized by the differences in
cultural data sets gathered by different consultants within the same villages in May 2014 and January 2015.
Some sites may be more important to (and only known by) particular individuals and the data will be biased
according to both who is asking the questions (and their relationship with the interviewee) and the knowledge
of that interviewee. Consequently, there is a potential for unidentified features of cultural importance within the
study area.
4.3 Results and Findings
4.3.1 Literature Review
The CTT Site is situated in an important area in relation to Iron Age social formation and settlement along the
Indian Ocean coast of southern Africa. Knowledge of Mozambique’s archaeological heritage is however
restricted by a lack of research and locally trained professionals (Adamowicz, 2015). The following section
seeks to summarize the literature review undertaken in order to establish the cultural heritage background and
context of the both wider region and the immediate project area.
4.3.1.1 Archaeology of the South Eastern African region/Mozambique
The archaeology of south eastern Africa has provided insight into human origins and pre-historic societal
development from the early Stone Age or Palaeolithic period (2.5 million years ago (Mya)), with a rich tapestry
of cultural remains dating right up to the 19th Century. Some of the oldest identified hominid fossils ever found
(dated to 2.5 - 2 Mya), along with evidence of discernible material culture, were located at the Olduvai Gorge,
northern Tanzania. Similar material culture has been found at sites throughout the southern African region,
including the Tete province, in north western Mozambique. These communities appear to have exploited
ecotonal environments, such as lakesides and savannahs, taking advantage of the abundant resources and
elevated biodiversity associated with such locales to support their hunter-gatherer lifestyle.
The later Stone Age in Mozambique is almost entirely unknown, there are 19 recorded sites in total, none of
which are within the project area. These early sites were identified by surface artefacts (microlithics) during the
Anthropological Missions to Mozambique, led by Santos Júnior, between 1936 and 1957 (Senna-Martinez,
Martins, Castelo and Evangelista, 2013). Consequently, it must be acknowledged that there may be gaps in
the explored archaeological record resulting from the unfavourable conditions under which collection took place,
depositional processes and an uncertain chronology. More recent investigations have been undertaken but are
limited to the Zimbabwe border area and the Mabote District (Adamowicz, 2011).
Sites in the wider southern Africa region, dated to throughout the Middle Stone Age and into the Late Stone
Age, provide evidence used to chart the rise of modern man, Homo sapiens, and the subsequent development
of societal complexity. In southern Africa this includes the well documented expansion and development of
independently innovated lithic industries and a diversification in subsistence strategies. The Prehistoric
chronological sequence (Table 1) is generally similar all over the region. The Middle Stone Age period is
characterized by the use of cores and the production of stone flakes to produce large bifacial tools and hand
axes. Late Stone Age technology is dominated by microlithic (small) tools and blades (e.g. quartz, flint), often
associated with rock art and (occasionally) burials. The Late Stone Age period in Mozambique thus provides a
link to later historical times (Deacon & Deacon 1999).
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
19
Table 1: Prehistoric chronology in Southern Africa
Years Before Present Description
2,000 Iron Age - Historic
22,000 – 2,000 Late Stone Age
250,000 – 22,000 Middle Stone Age
2,500,000 – 250,000 Early Stone Age
The evolution of modern man occurred within the context of the climatic volatility of the Pleistocene, with cyclical
variations in precipitation inducing shifts in vegetation, resulting in population movements and subsistence
changes. Ultimately, these changes resulted in a ‘revolution’ in subsistence, with greater sedentism and an
increased reliance on cereals which in turn led to the agricultural-based societies. Associated with this transition
are the developments of pottery traditions and the eventual emergence of metallurgy. Evidence from the Matola
area of southern Mozambique provides one of the earliest dates for the Iron Age in southern Africa and the
inherent development of metallurgy (dated to c. 70 AD) (Morais, 1988).
Coastal settlements with exotic trade goods, such as that at Chibuene (7th Century AD) and Bazaruto Island
(9th-10th Century AD), show the emergence of trade, both across the Indian Ocean and between indigenous
groups, evidencing further increases in social complexity and the growth of burgeoning maritime societies.
4.3.1.2 Archaeology of Central Mozambique
The archaeological study of the Mozambican coastal plain was a focus for research post-1975 independence
enabling a chrono-stratagraphic framework to be developed. The framework considers sites in ‘clusters’ or
‘traditions’ assuming that the pottery assemblages are similar to each other in terms of form and decoration
(Sinclair 1986 and Adamowicz, 2006).
During the early Iron Age, Bantu-speaking people gradually immigrated to southern Africa from the Congo and
Cameroon through Central and equatorial East Africa during the first and second century AD. The movement
of people from the interior and from further north, as well as migrating populations from the region itself, forced
different cultures to interact and exploit the same spaces. This resulted in some groups co-habiting, specifically
different types of agriculturists, but hunter-gatherer groups were generally forced to move or adopt a new
subsistence strategy.
In the archaeological record this is marked by the emergence of new pottery styles in the region, with cultural
similarities in terms of decoration. Cattle ownership was particularly important and can be seen by the
appearance of ritual burials of clay cattle figurines and cattle bones in human grave burials. Evidence of these
early farming communities are known as sites of Matola-tradition, named after a site on the Matola River.
The early Iron Age period is primarily based on radio carbon dates from the Hola Hola site (see Table 2 below)
and witnessed the beginning of a significant change in culture in Central Mozambique. A number of sites within
the Mozambican coastal plain have been dated to the 1st – 4th centuries AD and as a cluster represent the
earliest known farming communities in southern Africa (Adamowicz, 2015). Pottery recovered from these sites
is similar to Kwale ware found in Tanzania (Cruz and Silva, 1980, Sinclair et al, 1979 and Soper, 1982).
The interaction between these different groups increased societal complexity and may have even developed
hierarchies within communities, making subsistence strategy symbolic of status. This culminated in the
development of very substantial structures (in the Great Zimbabwe tradition – the Late Iron Age, stone-walled,
royal palace spanning 700+ hectares). The most notable of these structures in Mozambique is at Manyikeni
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
20
(AR-113) 52 km west of Vilanculos, dating from the 12th Century AD. Chibuene and Manyikeni are listed as a
tentative World Heritage Site (http://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/919/).
4.3.1.3 Prior Investigations
In general, the Inhassoro District is considered to have high archaeological potential due to its strategic setting
along coastal trade routes (both inland and along the shoreline) and the Govuro and Save Rivers. However,
the immediate project area was largely unexplored archaeologically prior to the Proponent’s activities in the
area. Most archaeological work within the province has been concentrated in four regions: Vilanculos; Mabote;
Govuro; and Inhassoro Districts (encompassing both Sofala and Inhambane Provinces). The most important
sites are listed in Table 2.
Table 2: Well documented cultural heritage investigations in wider area
Site Name Site Location Date Description
Mambone –
AR-101 & AR-
102
c80 km north of
Vilanculos,
Inhambane. Mouth of
the Save River.
Early – Late
Iron Age
Statutory protected site. Disturbed by Save
River.
Chibuene –
AR-106
c6 km south of
Vilanculos,
Inhambane.
6th-13th
centuries
Statutory protected and a tentative World
Heritage Site. Coastal trading settlement with
artefacts, such as glass beads, evidencing trade
links across the Indian Ocean. Pottery with shell
stamp motifs. Shell midden extending 100 m
Nhanchengue
– AR-107
Nhanchengue,
Inhambane.
Unknown Statutory protected site. Shows evidence of
Gokomere-Ziwa ceramic tradition.
Nhanimela 1 –
AR-108
c100 km north of
Vilanculos,
Inhambane.
Late Iron Age Statutory protected site. Late Farming
Community, Zimbabwe tradition settlement.
Ruinous stonewalled enclosure. Probably similar
residential and cultural pattern as in Manyikeni.
Manyikeni –
AR-113
c52 km north of
Vilanculos,
Inhambane.
1170±80 -
1610±70
Statutory protected site and a tentative World
Heritage Site. Substantial site, possibly seat of a
local ‘ruling dynasty’. Pottery confirms
association with Zimbabwe tradition. Consists of
enclosing stone wall (~1.5 m thick, enclosing an
area of 50x65 m) and farmers village. Artefacts
include trade goods such as beads, gold, sea
shells and ceramics indicating significance as a
trading centre between coastal communities and
those of interior. Three periods of occupation
suggested. Provides useful sequence for region
as a whole.
Ponta Dundo Bazaruto archipelago Unknown Archaeological type site of Gokomere-Ziwa
ceramic tradition. Shows ceramic products of
first co-existing communities of shepherds and
farmers.
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
21
Site Name Site Location Date Description
Hola-Hola Banks of Save River,
Central Mozambique
10th Century
AD
Hilltop settlement. First archaeological site of co-
existing agricultural and fishing communities, with
middens (27 in total) providing evidence of a
productive, flourishing community. Some pottery
similarities with Chibuene and Nhanchengue.
4.3.2 Archaeological Field Survey
4.3.2.1 Archaeological Remains
Nine archaeological sites (pre-fixed “AR”) were identified within the study area during the archaeological survey
in January 2015, the full details of these sites are presented in Appendix A and summarised below (Table 3). A
further six archaeological sites were noted within the wider area, including four statutory protected sites. These
comprise sites AR-101, AR-102, AR-106, AR-107, AR-108 and AR-113.
No additional archaeological sites were identified within the study area during the 2018 survey.
There are five archaeological sites that were identified for the PSA and LPG ESIA Project in 2014 that are
located within the study area for the CTT project. These sites, AR-1 – AR-5, are incorporated within the impact
assessment. Details of these sites is presented in Appendix B.
The locations of all archaeological sites identified are shown in Figure 18 and Figure 19.
Stone Age Sites
Site AR-109, located near Seelemane, approximately 8 km east of Mapanzene, is a potential Stone Age site.
The site was found to be relatively disturbed and partly inaccessible due to thick grass cover however some
lithics (quartz) were recorded in the vicinity (Figure 10). The site is approximately 2.5 km from the coast and
may be indicative of a Late Stone Age camp in the vicinity as some Late Iron Age pottery was found. A singular
Stone Age site was also recorded during the 2014 ESIA survey stage (AR-4). Three lithic artefacts (limestone)
were observed on the surface. This site is situated inland, in proximity to the Govuro River and south east of
Mangugumete.
Figure 10: Surface scatter at Site AR-109 (Adamowicz, 2015)
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
22
Iron Age Sites
All remaining sites located within the study area have been dated to the Iron Age. These include one Early Iron
Age site (AR-111) and six Late Iron Age sites (AR-103 – 105, AR-110, AR-112 and AR-114 – 115). AR-111 is
a pottery scatter site possibly indicative of a small farming community. The site is situated south east of
Manusse, approximately 5 km west of the powerline route.
Figure 11: Early Iron Age pottery artefact recorded from Site AR-111 (Adamowicz, 2015)
The Late Iron Age sites are also evidenced by pottery scatter without exception. Iron slag was also observed
at site AR-105 (adjacent to the transportation route at Temane) and a shell midden deposit was recorded at site
AR-114 (coastal, east of Mapanzene).
Site AR-103 is situated along the proposed route for the transportation of equipment (existing EN1 road),
approximately 5 km north of Litlau. Pottery sherds were recovered in the area, covering approximately 300 m².
The depth of the deposit is presently unknown. The pottery itself is likely representative of a late Iron Age date
farming community. Typical sherd decoration comprised double or triple parallel wavy incised lines with (Figure
12). The site may be associated with trade networks positioned along the coast.
Figure 12: Pottery from Site AR-103 (Adamowicz, 2015)
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
23
Site AR-105 comprises a small area of surface scatter, including Luangwa tradition ceramics, glass beads and
some iron slag believed representative of a farming community settled in the 1st - 5th centuries AD. Although
few artefacts are now visible on the surface, well-preserved below-ground remains have been investigated at
similar sites in the region (Adamowicz, 2015).
Figure 13: Pottery from Site AR-105 (Adamowicz, 2015)
Site AR-110 is located with the south eastern most corner of the study area. The site was found to be heavily
disturbed by agricultural activities though some sherds of Luangwa tradition pottery were observed over an
extensive area (Figure 14).
Figure 14: Pottery scatter at Site AR-110 (Adamowicz, 2015)
Site AR-112 is situated approximately 3 km north of the proposed transport route north of Mabime. The site
was relatively large in comparison to the others observed with pot sherds scattered over a wide area (Figure
15).
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
24
Figure 15: Site AR-112 (Adamowicz, 2015)
Site AR-114 is situated north of Seta, on the coast. Archaeological evidence was found to be limited at this
location however, a shallow shell midden was observed (Figure 16).
Figure 16: Shell midden deposit at AR-114 (Adamowicz, 2015)
Site AR-115 was recorded during prospecting in 2000 and found to be severely disturbed (on the surface) by
recent agricultural activities and erosion. Pottery observed on the surface is believed to date to the 12 – 16th
centuries AD (Figure 17).
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
25
Figure 17: Pottery recorded at Site AR-115 (Adamowicz, 2015)
Additional Iron Age dated sites recorded during the PSA survey in 2014 included one Early Iron Age and three
Late Iron Age sites comprising pottery surface scatter typical of the first settlements along coastal Mozambique
and broadly dated to the 9th – 18th centuries AD, these sites are listed in Appendix A and mapped in Figure 18
and Figure 19.
Table 3: Archaeological sites with the Study Area identified during 2015 field survey3
Site ID Location/Project
Component
Description Coordinates
(UTM 36K)
Estimated
Date
AR-103
Along route for
transportation of
equipment
Small settlement site. Representative
of a LIA farming community. Pottery
scatters on surface.
716719, 7601505 Late Iron Age
AR-104 c30 km west of
powerline
Dispersed Luangwa tradition pottery.
Disturbed by agriculture and erosion 706262, 7596848 Late Iron Age
AR-105
Adjacent to route for
transportation of
equipment
Small area with high concentration of
Luangwa pottery. 716126, 7598079 Late Iron Age
AR-109 c9 km east of
Mapanzene
Microlith quartz and LIA pottery, high
grass cover, some agricultural
disturbance
735064, 7594151 Late Stone
Age?
AR-110 South eastern
extent of study area
Lago Pecane. Some Luangwa pottery.
In prominent and striking natural
promontory location, some agricultural
disturbance.
737374, 7567975 Late Iron Age
3 Additional survey carried out for the Project in 2018 recorded no new archaeological sites
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
26
Site ID Location/Project
Component
Description Coordinates
(UTM 36K)
Estimated
Date
AR-111 c 5 km south east of
Manusse Pottery scatters. 708393, 7583982
Early and
Late Iron Age
AR-112
c 5 km north of route
for transportation of
equipment
Malangojiva. Former settlement
location - repeatedly mentioned in
local histories as one of many former
settlements (resettled as a result of
recent industrial development)
723071, 7600815 Late Iron Age
AR-114 c11 km north east of
Mapanzene
Limited evidence – shallow shell
midden and some recent ceramic 736093, 7595224 Late Iron Age
AR-115
c.2 km north of
beach landing
option at Maritima
Pottery site almost entirely disturbed
by agriculture 726481, 7619521 Late Iron Age
Areas Absent of Archaeological Evidence
The targeted field surveys highlighted areas where no archaeological evidence was recovered. This includes
the following CTT project-related areas:
Proposed power plant site;
Water pipeline route across Govuro river;
Transmission line route; and
The three beach landing options.
Although no archaeological evidence was recovered from project-related areas, this does preclude the
possibility of undiscovered archaeological remains existing within those areas.
4.3.2.2 Archaeological Summary
Dispersed pottery scatter was evident throughout the area surveyed with concentrations observed in areas of
predicted historic (primarily Iron Age) agricultural and/or settlement activity. The number of archaeological sites
inspected were found to have been damaged as a result of human (agricultural) or climate induced erosion. A
small amount of lithic scatter was also recovered, indicative of typologies common across Prehistoric southern
Africa.
The artefacts identified during the 2015 fieldwalking phase, namely pottery, shell and lithics, are considered to
be typical of those well-known sites along the southern coast of Mozambique and are supplementary to and
comparable with, the archaeological areas identified during the PSA survey in 2014.
The identification and analysis of tangible archaeological material (artefacts) was, however, limited to that
recovered during surface inspection. The relationships (if any) between the surface scatters observed (lithics,
pottery, shells) and any sub-surface remains (e.g. settlement and/or industrial activity) cannot be verified at this
stage.
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
27
Further investigation will be required to determine whether these remains are indicative of past activity in the
immediate project locality or purely representative of ephemeral, possibly migratory, landscape exploitation.
There remains a potential for previously unidentified archaeological sites and artefacts to exist within the study
area.
At present, the artefacts identified within the study area are categorised as ‘Moveable’ cultural heritage as
defined by Mozambican Law (10/1988) and no features were found which could be classed as ‘Critical’ or ‘Non-
Replicable’ cultural heritage, as defined by IFC (PS 8, 2012).
Figure 17and Figure 18 shows the location of all archaeological sites identified.
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
28
Figure 18: Archaeological sites identified by baseline study
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
29
Figure 19: Archaeological sites within study area
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
30
4.3.3 Community Consultation and Cultural Survey
The results of the cultural survey are summarised in this section. The full details of the community consultation
stage, including interview transcripts, are presented in Appendix A.
The community consultation survey results are discussed by site type and each individual site has been given
a ‘Site I.D’ number, prefixed by the site sub-category, e.g. CE for cemetery, BU for burial, CH for church, MO
for mosque, SP for sacred place and MP for medicinal plant. These are shown on Figure 26 and Figure 27.
4.3.3.1 Settlement History and Oral History
The oral tradition was found to be a strong feature among the Xitswa-speaking communities within the study
area. The natural landscape and fishing customs are associated with stories, legends, songs and pottery,
passed from one generation to the next (Adamowicz & Sinclair 1981, 1984, Adamowicz, 2015). These elements
of intangible heritage are highly valued by the local communities, enhancing their sense of identity, however it
also means that written settlement histories are scarce and village-founding dates and associated information
many vary from person to person (ibid).
As a consequence, the villages were found to differ in age, according to the oral traditions of each community,
and variations between the results recorded by different surveys were found to exist in the oral record. The
following information regarding village names and meaning derives primarily from the 2014 PSA and LPG
project interviews:
Mangarelane: name is very old, probably derived from the first man who settled here approximately 84
years ago, and/or the man, Mangarelane, who refused to surrender to the Portuguese. Current settlers
are 3rd and 4th generation;
Chipongo: name derived from the first man who settled here, approximately 35 years ago;
Mapanzene: derived from the name Nhagonzoene, the grandchild of Nhagonzo (another settlement in the
region) the age of the settlement is unknown;
Mabime: the name is that of an ancient man with a tumour so large that it touched the ground, the people
began to call him Mabime and the name stuck. The age of the settlement is not known;
Mangugumete: the village is believed to date to colonial times, with the name Mangugumete meaning
‘where someone decides to stay’;
Manusse: the age and origin of the settlement is not known. An interviewee for the 2014 PSA and LPG
project survey was noted to have arrived in 1950, attracted by the good agricultural land; and
Chitsotso: named after the first founder. This founder had many children and the people started to call him
Chitsotso, which means locust. The age of the settlement is not known but the present community arrived
in the late 1980s as a result of the civil war.
4.3.3.2 Cemeteries and Burials
Communities were primarily recorded to bury their dead within settlement areas, near houses, rather than in
demarcated burial grounds. Nine burials for community leaders were recorded in the study area (BU-101 – 09)
in 2015, as well as four cemetery sites (e.g. associated with religious buildings), CE-102 – 105. A fifth cemetery
site was identified outside the study area; site CE-101 is a cemetery site on the River Save, approximately 50
km north of the study area. The grave sites listed in Table 4 include those located by Sasol’s demining and
clearance team in December 2014 and January 2015. A number of historic headstones (possibly colonial) were
also noted in the study area which may require further investigation. Three additional burials (BU-110 – BU-
112) were identified in the 2018 survey, as well as two additional cemeteries (CE-106 and CE-107).
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
31
All cemeteries and burials identified in 2015 and 2018 surveys are listed in Table 4 below. This is not a complete
list of all burial sites in the study area and there is a potential for previously unknown (and undisturbed)
cemeteries/burials to exist. It should be noted that the 19 burial and cemetery sites identified in 2015 and 2018
are in addition to 26 sites recorded in 2014 for the PSA and LPG project survey (these locations are listed in
Appendix B and mapped in Appendix D). A number of these formerly recorded sites are situated along the main
EN1 road proposed for the transportation of equipment during the CTT project and north of Mabime, where the
route crosses the Govuro River.
Furthermore, during both the 2014 and 2015 fieldwork, a high potential for unmarked burial sites along the roads
between the villages in the study area was identified, particularly near Mabime; Mapanzene and Mangugumete,
possibly where unknown individuals were laid to rest during the civil war. These locations are well known to the
community. The presence of Baobab trees are also considered as indicators of an important burial site by the
local communities (particularly if the tree is very mature).
4.3.3.3 Churches and Mosques
Christianity was found to be prevalent in the project area, sitting alongside traditional religious practice. Six
churches (CH-101 – CH-106) were noted across the villages within the study area in 2015, as well as one
Mosque (MO-101), approximately 50 km north. Two additional churches, CH-107 and CH-108, were identified
in 2018. These sites are listed in Table 4 and mapped on Figure 26 and Figure 27. These are in addition to 20
churches recorded (but not mapped) during the PSA survey in 2014. These were found within the villages of
Mangarelane, Chipongo, Mabime, Mangugumete, Manusse and Chitsotso.
Figure 20: Church of St Ana, on EN1 south of Maimelane (Adamowicz, 2015)
4.3.3.4 Sacred Places
Animist activity and traditional ceremonies (tied to a particular natural place of cultural significance, e.g. sacred
forest) were observed during the PSA study (2014) and were further investigated during the 2015 and 2018
cultural site surveys. Specific sites of cultural importance are noted below and listed more fully in Appendix A.
These sites are mapped in Figure 26 and Figure 27.
Seven sites of cultural importance ‘sacred places’ were identified in 2015, these include six sites within the
cultural heritage study area (SP-102 – 107). No additional sacred places were recorded in 2018. The known
sites comprise sacred trees, sacred forest and a sacred pool. Where relevant, the ten additional sites recorded
in 2014 are incorporated with the discussion below, these 2014 cultural sites are included in the cultural heritage
gazetteer (Appendix B) and mapped in Figure 26 and Figure 27.
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
32
Sacred Trees and Forest
One specific sacred tree site was identified during the 2015 survey (SP-107). This site is potentially an ancient
burial ground, situated around an old Baobab at Chipongo (Figure 21). The 2014 PSA community survey
recorded four additional sacred trees in the vicinity of Mangarelane, Mabime, Manusse, and Chitsotso. These
trees were often associated with areas of sacred forest, two of which contained cemeteries (at Mangugumete
and Chitsotso). These locations are are included in the cultural heritage gazetteer (Appendix B) and mapped
in Figure 26 and Figure 27.
Community interviews in Mangarelane suggested that due to a loss of tall trees in the surrounding area (and
consequently a loss of associated sacred spaces) many ceremonies are now conducted by elders within the
village itself.
Figure 21: Site SP-107 sacred place near Chipongo village (Adamowicz, 2015)
Sacred Pool
Two sacred pool sites were located during the 2015 survey. Site SP-101 is approximately 15 km north of the
study area alongside the EN1 road. Site SP-104 is situated on the coast approximately 20 m south of Chipongo.
The 2014 PSA survey identified an additional sacred water body at Mabime (within the village) used to bury
stillborn babies. It is taboo to use the pool for normal activities such as washing.
Other Sacred Places
Site SP-102 is located on the proposed northernmost transport route branch towards the coast. The site was
identified as a spiritual centre but appeared abandoned. Site SP-103, south of Mangarelane, was identified as
a site of male circumcision (Figure 22).
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
33
Figure 22: Site SP-103 place for male circumcision (Adamowicz, 2015)
Site SP-105, in the vicinity of St Ana Church (CH-106), is an area identified by the local community as a sacred
place, which may be used for circumcision and/or contain an old cemetery site (Figure 23).
Figure 23: Site SP-105 sacred place (Adamowicz, 2015)
Site SP-107 is the residence and sanctuary of a local artist, traditional doctor and community leader (Figure 24).
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
34
Figure 24: Entrance to site SP-107 (Adamowicz, 2015)
All of the above cultural and sacred sites are not considered ‘secret’ and access is granted freely by the local
community. However, the information pertaining to these sites is constrained by that information which the
community was willing to share. As such, there remains a potential for as yet unrecorded sacred sites and
secret sites (and related intangible activities and taboos) to exist within the study area. Those sites described
above are summarised in Table 4.
Table 4: Cultural sites identified during community consultation (2015 and 2018)
Site ID Site Type Description Coordinates (UTM
36K or Lat,Long)
Village/locality
BU-101 Burial Burial, Sacred
Place, claim by
nephew of Pululane
Milioro António as
Sacred Place and
burial of his
ancestor. Nothing
visible.
708107, 7583993
Manusse
BU-102 Burial No visible burial.
White cotton sheet
indicates area of
cemetery. Survey
undertaken.
726334, 7597963
Mabime
BU-103 Burial Burial of the
founder of
Chipongo in the end
of 19 c. AD. No
733919, 7589938
Chipongo
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
35
Site ID Site Type Description Coordinates (UTM
36K or Lat,Long)
Village/locality
visible
archaeological
evidence.
BU-104 Burial Only two burials are
visible. Grass very
high. Lot of cobras
which are
considered
protector of
ancestors.
Interview with local
women.
732758, 7601174 Mangarelane
BU-105 Burial One grave, 15m
east of powerline
servitude.
Identified by Sasol
clearance team.
-21.804111
35.036528
Manusse /
powerline
BU-106 Burial One grave, 30m
west of powerline
servitude.
Identified by Sasol
clearance team.
-21.812833
35.033000
Manusse /
powerline
BU-107 Burial Two graves, 15 m
east of powerline
servitude. Identified
by Sasol clearance
team.
-21.896944
35.071611
EN1
BU-108 Burial Two graves.
Identified by Sasol
clearance team.
-21.898000
35.071583
Powerline
BU-109 Burial One grave, 3m east
of powerline
servitude.
Identified by Sasol
clearance team.
-21.948611
35.100333
Powerline
BU-110 Burial The grave of
Santos´ Mabime
family (father).
Identified by
724897, 7606809 Mangarelane II
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
36
Site ID Site Type Description Coordinates (UTM
36K or Lat,Long)
Village/locality
archaeological
team during survey
19/06/18.
BU-111 Burial Two graves.
Unknown family.
Identified by
archaeological
team during survey
19/06/18.
725666, 7606208 Mangarelane II
BU-112 Burial One grave.
Unknown family.
Identified by
archaeological
team during survey
19/06/18.
727810, 7598642 Mabime
CE-101 Cemetery Partially destroyed
by River Save.
710066, 7677891
Mambone
CE-102 Cemetery Cemetery for
people from
Nhamanhcea two
generations ago.
731614, 7589086
Chipongo
CE-103 Cemetery Sacred Place,
probably with
burials. Some
recent potsherd
found
722872, 7601191
Mabime
CE-104 Cemetery Five graves.
Identified by Sasol
clearance team
-21.864917
35.052833
Powerline
CE-105 Cemetery Three graves.
Identified by Sasol
clearance team.
Traditional
ceremony carried
out.
-21.884861
35.064111
Powerline
CE - 106 Cemetery Five graves.
Identified by
archaeological
725825, 7606222 Mangarelane II
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
37
Site ID Site Type Description Coordinates (UTM
36K or Lat,Long)
Village/locality
team during survey
19/06/18.
CE - 107 Cemetery Seven graves.
Identified by
archaeological
team during survey
19/06/18.
719326, 7599913 Mabime
CH-101 Church Remarkable
architecture. Needs
to be renovated.
Interview with
Cristina Alfredo.
Guardian with local
nearby cemetery.
710518, 76778833
Mambone
CH-102 Church Evangelical Church
Guardian with local
nearby cemetery
714664, 7612121
EN1
CH-103 Church Apostolic Church,
Assembleia de
Deus. Guardian
with local nearby
cemetery.
731389, 7589159
Chipongo
CH-104 Church Church Apostol's
with rustic original
architecture.
716789, 7580422
EN1
CH-105 Church Methodist Church in
need of renovation.
Interview with
priest. Guardian
with local nearby
cemetery.
731957, 7602292 Mangarelane
CH-106 Church Church St. Ana and
professional school
for boys and girls.
Field Survey,
Interview
716638, 7601677
Maimelane
CH - 107 Church Catholic church of
St. José (semi-
permanent), built
725723, 7606467 Mangarelane II
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
38
Site ID Site Type Description Coordinates (UTM
36K or Lat,Long)
Village/locality
with rudimental
material. Identified
by archaeological
team during survey
19/06/18.
CH - 108 Church Catholic church
(semi-permanent)
built with rudimental
material. Identified
by archaeological
team during survey
19/06/18.
719509, 7599787 Mabime
MO-101 Mosque Mosque. General
information and
visit. Guardian with
local nearby
cemetery
710909, 7677940 Mambone
SP-101 Sacred place Sacred Place. Field
Survey
694159, 7635550
EN1
SP-102 Sacred place Sacred Place.
Centro de
Reavivamento
Espiritual. Field
survey. Interview
completed.
720470, 7615047
Mabime
SP-103 Sacred place Sacred Place -
circumcision.
Where skins are
buried. Field Survey
and interview with
local young men
recently
circumcised done
by Ercidio Nhatule
in Xitswa
732758, 7601394 Mangarelane
SP-104 Sacred place Sacred Place.
Dialog with some
women. Bathing in
the Pecane Lake
help pregnant
737921, 7567790
Vilanculos
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
39
Site ID Site Type Description Coordinates (UTM
36K or Lat,Long)
Village/locality
women have
healthy child.
SP-105 Sacred place Considered by local
people as Sacred
Place but not
supported by
church. Possibly an
old cemetery.
716489, 7601678
Maimelane
SP-106 Sacred place Paulo Vilankulos,
artist, community
leader, traditional
doctor. Interview
completed.
733919, 7589938
Chipongo
SP-107 Sacred place Sacred
Place,probably
burial of community
leaders.
731770, 7588865 Chipongo
4.3.3.5 Intangible cultural heritage
Among the communities surveyed in the CTT project area, an emphasis on locally valued unique traditions,
often impossible for outsiders to fully comprehend, were observed. In this context intangible cultural heritage
is defined as the traditional practices, cultural norms and knowledge transmitted from one generation to the
next, which communities or individuals recognise as part of their cultural heritage. Such (non-material) assets
are protected by Mozambican cultural heritage law (see Section 2.0).
Common community heritage events were observed across the communities surveyed, including:
Christian religious holidays, such as Christmas and Easter;
Muslim Ramadan;
Initiation of young boys and their return from the forest after circumcision;
Birth of first born son;
The first fishing of the season;
Cobra snakes are considered protectors of the ancestors; and
Rites of initiations.
A number of specific intangible heritage elements were identified during the community interviews conducted
for the 2014 PSA survey. These were seen to vary from village to village and commonly linked to a specific
natural feature, e.g. a sacred tree. Further details are provided in the PSA cultural heritage report (Rrequal,
Ancient & Golder Associados Moҫambique Ltd, 2014). Where practices are linked to a specific place, these are
listed in mapped in Figure 26 and Figure 27.
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
40
Medicinal Plants and Traditional Practice
In Mozambique, medicinal plants constitute a valuable instrument of traditional medicine, with Curandeiros
widely used in rural areas as the main source of medicines for primary health care (Adamowicz, 2015). The
socio-cultural value of this resource is largely unstudied. There are a number of plants preferred for the
treatment of locally prevalent diseases (listed in Appendix A), however, the collection of these species is
uncontrolled meaning that a large number are threatened with extinction.
During the 2014 cultural study for the PSA, traditional medicinal knowledge and specific plant species used for
the treatment of disease and aliments were identified in the vicinity of three villages: Mapanzene, Mabime and
Chipongo. This information was expanded during the 2015 cultural study, which includes interviews with
practitioners of traditional healing with stores set up along the EN-1 road (Sites MP-101 – 03, see Figure 25).
Details of these sites are summarised in Table 5.
Figure 25: Produce at clinic MP-101 (Adamowicz, 2015)
Table 5: Centres of traditional medicine identified during 2015 community consultation
Site ID Site Type Description Coordinates (UTM
36K)
Village
MP-101 Traditional Medical
Practice
Medicinal plants
located in vicinity 716407, 7613312 (roadside – EN1)
MP-102 Traditional Medical
Practice
Medicinal practice
based almost
entirely on shells
and clay
716612, 7605310 (roadside – EN1)
MP-103 Traditional Medical
Practice
Medicinal plants
located in vicinity 716427, 7600269
Litlau (roadside –
EN1)
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
41
4.3.3.6 Cultural Site Summary
The community consultation phase and cultural site survey identified a number of significant and unique cultural
features within the study area. Although the settlement history is largely unknown and subject to debate, oral
traditions suggest that Mangarelane may be the oldest village.
Burials were recorded primarily within the village centres and next to houses, two were also found to exist within
areas of sacred forest. There is however a high potential for unmarked (and ancient) burials along the roads
between villages and elsewhere: those grave sites identified are not considered to be a complete list. Three
new burial sites, two new cemeteries and two new churches were identified within the study area during the
2018 survey.
Traditional cultural practices (ceremonial activity, initiation rites, traditional medicine etc.) and related natural
sites with cultural values (sacred trees, forests, pool) were found throughout the villages surveyed in 2014 and
2015, no additional sites were identified in 2018.
Communities were found to resort to ritual activity in the event of hardship or need, as required. These activities
were linked to specific cultural sites, often with intrinsic ancestral links and cultural landscape connotations.
The information pertaining to cultural sites and traditional practice is constrained by that information which the
community was willing to share. There remains a potential for as yet unrecorded sacred sites to exist within the
study area.
It is considered that all identified sacred sites fall into IFC’s ‘Non-Replicable’ category (PS 8, 2012) and are
defined ‘Immoveable’ by Mozambican Law (10/1988).
All the cultural sites identified are shown on Figure 26 and Figure 27.
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
42
Figure 26: Cultural sites identified by baseline study
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
43
Figure 27: Cultural sites within study area
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
44
4.4 Cultural Heritage Site Valuation
In order to summarise the results baseline survey and to facilitate the impact assessment, all sites recorded
have been rated in terms of their cultural heritage value. This baseline value is derived from a consideration of
each feature or site in terms of its form, survival, condition, complexity, context and period.
Valuation has been calculated in terms of a perceived research worth and with reference to Mozambican
designations (‘moveable’ and ‘immovable’). It also takes into account the scale at which the site matters (e.g.
local or regional) and their rarity. The results of the valuation process, for every site identified, are presented in
Table 6.
The following values (low – high) have been applied to the identified cultural heritage site types within the study
area:
Low: sites of low local value, in the sense that new buildings (e.g. most churches, mosques) can be re-
established, archaeological sites or artefacts which are common and well-researched;
Medium: sites potentially movable under certain conditions and of moderate regional or community value
(e.g. medicinal plants) and/or a potential research value (e.g. artefactual remains requiring further
research), and
High: both ‘moveable’ and ‘immovable’ sites of high national value and of high local value (e.g. burials,
ancestral sacred places); statutory protected sites.
Also included in Table 6 are those cultural heritage sites identified for the PSA and LNG ESIA Project that may
be impacted by the CTT project. The valuation ascribed to them in the 2014 impact assessment (Golder
Associates, 2014) has been used for this assessment. These sites are italicised in Table 6.
4.4.1 Archaeological Site Valuation
As a result of the literature review and survey phase the archaeological potential of the Inhassoro area is
considered to be relatively high. This potential relates to its favourable geographic location, making it an
attractive place for prehistoric settlement. This theory is substantiated by the artefact remains gathered from
the field surveys in both 2014 and 2015. However, those archaeological sites presently recovered within the
study area ultimately amount to artefact surface scatter; none of these are unique to the region’s archaeological
record. Without further analysis and intrusive investigation (e.g. trial trenching) it is not possible to relate these
materials to sites of particular significance (e.g. past settlement or industrial activity). In summary the
archaeological sites within the study area, AR-102 –105, AR-109 – 112 and AR-114 - 115 are valued as low –
medium to account for their potential research value and (as yet unsubstantiated) association with sub-surface
features. Sites beyond the study area AR-101, AR-106 – 108 and AR-113 are valued as high to account for
their protected status and proven research value.
4.4.2 Cultural Site
The significance of the cultural sites identified in the study area has been calculated in terms of the potential
negative impact on the community in the event that they (the community) or the sites themselves are relocated.
In order to ensure maintenance of the ‘cultural norm’ (i.e. continuation of normal cultural activity) for those
communities affected by the project, access to those local cultural sites identified in the study area is required.
Burial sites and sacred sites which provide tangible ancestral links to the past (e.g. a sacred tree) are considered
particularly sensitive and ‘immovable’. Those features associated with unique, intangible, cultural practice
(medicinal plants, sacred sites) are also highly sensitive.
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
45
In summary, all sacred places (SP-101 – 107) are valued as high. The majority of churches within the study
area (CH -102 – 105) have been valued as low in account of their relative modernity and potential movability.
Church CH-106, however, has been valued as medium to account for its architectural value.
Table 6: Cultural Heritage Site Valuation Summary
Site ID Site Type Description Location Valuation
AR-1 Archaeological Late Iron Age
Pottery and Lithic
Scatter
Proposed data
gathering well I-
G6PX-6
LOW - MEDIUM
AR-2 Archaeological Late Iron Age
Pottery Scatter
Proposed well pad
I-G6PX-4
LOW - MEDIUM
AR-3 Archaeological Early Iron Age
Pottery Scatter and
Shells
Existing pad I-14 LOW - MEDIUM
AR-4 Archaeological Late Stone Age
Lithics
1 km south of
proposed flowline
LOW - MEDIUM
AR-5 Archaeological Late Iron Age Shell
Midden
Proposed well pad
I-G6PX-2
LOW
AR-101 Archaeological Mambone 2 -
Archaeological
Site, disturbed by
river Save erosion.
Field survey
completed.
c80 km north of
Vilanculos,
Inhambane. Mouth
of the Save River.
HIGH
AR-102 Archaeological Mambone 1 -
Archaeological
almost totally
disturbed by fluvial
erosion. Interview
with Cristina
Alfredo.
c80 km north of
Vilanculos,
Inhambane. Mouth
of the Save River.
LOW
AR-103 Archaeological Settlement site.
Archaeological site.
Late Iron Age.
Along route for
transportation of
equipment
MEDIUM
AR-104 Archaeological Settlement site.
Late Iron Age.
Dispersed pottery
Luangwa Tradition.
Site disturbed by
practice of
agriculture and
c30 km west of
powerline
LOW
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
46
Site ID Site Type Description Location Valuation
erosion. Systematic
field survey.
AR-105 Archaeological Small area with
high concentration
of Luangwa
Tradition Pottery
and iron slag.
Adjacent to route
for transportation of
equipment
MEDIUM
AR-106 Archaeological Chibuene. Coastal
trading settlement
with artefacts, such
as glass beads,
evidencing trade
links across the
Indian Ocean.
Pottery with shell
stamp motifs.
c6 km south of
Vilanculos,
Inhambane.
HIGH
AR-107 Archaeological Nhachengue.
Archaeological
Site, evidence of
Gokomere-Ziwa
ceramic tradition
Nhanchengue,
Inhambane.
HIGH
AR-108 Archaeological Archaeological site.
Late Iron Age.
Stone walls.
Zimbabwe
Tradition.
c100 km north of
Vilanculos,
Inhambane.
HIGH
AR-109 Archaeological Few quartz
microlith and Late
Iron Age pottery.
Site covered by
high grass and
partially disturbed
by agriculture.
c9 km east of
Mapanzene
LOW
AR-110 Archaeological Late Iron Age
Archaeological
Site. Luangwa
Tradition decorated
pottery. Disturbed
by agriculture.
South eastern
extent of study area
LOW
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
47
Site ID Site Type Description Location Valuation
AR-111 Archaeological Archaeological site.
?Early and Late
Iron Age.
c 5 km south east
of Manusse
MEDIUM
AR-112 Archaeological Archaeological site.
Late Iron Age.
c 5 km north of
route for
transportation of
equipment
LOW
AR-113 Archaeological Manyikeni.
Madzimbabwe.
Open Air Museum.
Stone wall.
Zimbabwe
Tradition.
c52 km north of
Vilanculos, beyond
study area.
HIGH
AR-114 Archaeological Archaeological site.
Late Iron Age.
Limited
archaeological
evidence and
shallow shell
midden.
c11 km north east
of Mapanzene.
LOW
AR-115 Archaeological Archaeological
Site. Late Iron Age.
Recorded in 2000,
entirely disturbed
by agriculture. Field
survey.
c.2 km north of
beach landing
option at Maritima
LOW
BU-101 Cultural and
Religious
Burial, Sacred
Place, claim by
nephew of Pululane
Milioro António as
Sacred Place and
burial of his
ancestor. Nothing
visible.
Manusse HIGH
BU-102 Religious No visible burial.
White cotton sheet
indicates area of
cemetery.
Interviewed
Guardian and local
On the way to
Mabime.
HIGH
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
48
Site ID Site Type Description Location Valuation
people. Survey
undertaken.
BU-103 Religious Burial of the
founder of
Chipongo in the
end of 19 c. AD. No
visible
archaeological
evidence.
Chipongo HIGH
BU-104 Religious Only two burials
are visible. Grass
very high. Lot of
cobras which are
considered
protector of
ancestors.
Interview with local
women.
Mangarelane HIGH
BU-105 Religious One grave.
Identified by Sasol
clearance team.
Manusse, 15m east
of powerline
servitude.
HIGH
BU-106 Religious One grave.
Identified by Sasol
clearance team.
Manusse, 30m
west of powerline
servitude.
HIGH
BU-107 Religious Two graves.
Identified by Sasol
clearance team.
Burial, 15 m east of
powerline
servitude.
HIGH
BU-108 Religious Two graves.
Identified by Sasol
clearance team.
Burial, along
powerline servitude
HIGH
BU-109 Religious One grave.
Identified by Sasol
clearance team.
Burial, 3m east of
powerline servitude
HIGH
BU - 110 Religious The grave of
Santos´ Mabime
family (father).
Identified by
archaeological
team during survey
19/06/18.
Mangarelane II
-21.62769
35.17279
HIGH
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
49
Site ID Site Type Description Location Valuation
BU - 111 Religious Two graves.
Unknown family.
Identified by
archaeological
team during survey
19/06/18
Mangarelane II
-21.63302
35.18030
HIGH
BU - 112 Religious One grave.
Unknown family.
Identified by
archaeological
team during survey
19/06/18
Mabime
-21.70105
35.20204
HIGH
CE-101 Religious Partially destroyed
by River Save.
Interview with
guardian and a
local.
Old Mambone HIGH
CE-102 Religious Cemetery for
people from
Nhamanhcea two
generations ago.
Interview with some
people/Survey
Nhamanhcea HIGH
CE-103 Cultural and
Religious
Sacred Place,
probably with
burials. Some
recent potsherd
found
Malongojiva HIGH
CE-104 Religious Five graves.
Identified by Sasol
clearance team
Cemetery, along
powerline servitude
HIGH
CE-105 Religious Three graves.
Identified by Sasol
clearance team.
Traditional
ceremony carried
out.
Cemetery, along
powerline servitude
HIGH
CE - 106 Religious Cemetery. Five
graves. Identified
by archaeological
Mangarelane II
725825 7606222
HIGH
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
50
Site ID Site Type Description Location Valuation
team during survey
19/06/18.
CE - 107 Religious Cemetery. Seven
graves. Identified
by archaeological
team during survey
19/06/18.
Mabime
719326 7599913
HIGH
CH-101 Religious Remarkable
architecture. Needs
to be renovated.
Interview with
Cristina Alfredo.
Guardian with local
nearby cemetery.
Mambone MEDIUM
CH-102 Religious Evangelical Church
Guardian with local
nearby cemetery
Jofane, along
transportation route
LOW
CH-103 Religious Apostolic Church,
Assembleia de
Deus. Guardian
with local nearby
cemetery.
Chipongo LOW
CH-104 Religious Church Apostol's
with rustic original
architecture.
Apostolic Church LOW
CH-105 Religious Methodist Church
in need of
renovation.
Interview with
priest. Guardian
with local nearby
cemetery.
Methodist Church LOW
CH-106 Religious Church St. Ana and
professional school
for boys and girls.
Field Survey,
Interview
M.C.St. Ana, along
transportation route
MEDIUM
CH - 107 Religious Catholic church of
St. José (semi-
permanent) with
Mangarelane II
725723 7606467
LOW
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
51
Site ID Site Type Description Location Valuation
build with
rudumental
material. Identified
by archaeological
team during survey
19/06/18.
CH - 108 Religious Catholic church
(semi-permanent)
with build with
rudumental
material. Identified
by archaeological
team during survey
19/06/18
Mabime
719509 7599787
LOW
MO-101 Religious Mosque. General
information and
visit. Guardian with
local nearby
cemetery.
Old Mambone /
Govuro
LOW
MP-101 Cultural Medicinal site -
interview with
Curandeiro
nephew.
Curandeiro himself
went to forest to
look for natural
medicine. Interview
completed.
North of
Maimelane, along
transportation route
LOW
MP-102 Cultural Medicinal site -
Traditional Doctor
Recently open
practice. Medicine
is not based on
plants, almost all
are shells or clays.
Temane MEDIUM
MP-103 Cultural Medicinal site -
Traditional Doctor
Manique Eusébio
was born in Malawi
but family is from
Inhambane
Litlau, along
transportation route
HIGH
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
52
Site ID Site Type Description Location Valuation
province. Interview
completed.
SP-101 Cultural Sacred Place. Field
Survey
Lago Sangene. 15
km north of study
area
HIGH
SP-102 Cultural Sacred Place.
Centro de
Reavivamento
Espiritual. Field
survey. Interview
completed.
8 km west of
Inhassoro, along
transportation route
LOW
SP-103 Cultural Sacred Place -
circumcision.
Where skins are
buried. Field
Survey and
interview with local
young men recently
circumcised done
by Ercidio Nhatule
in Xitswa
Mangarelane I HIGH
SP-104 Cultural Sacred Place.
Dialog with some
women. Bathing in
the Pecane Lake
help pregnant
women have
healthy child.
Pecane, south
eastern boundary
of study area.
HIGH
SP-105 Cultural and
Religious
Considered by local
people as Sacred
Place but not
supported by
church. Old
cemetery.
Maimelane, along
transportation route
HIGH
SP-106 Cultural Paulo Vilankulos,
artist, community
leader, traditional
doctor. Interview
completed.
Chipongo HIGH
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
53
Site ID Site Type Description Location Valuation
SP-107 Cultural and
Religious
Sacred Place (5),
probably burial of
community leaders.
Chipongo HIGH
CE-01 Cultural Cemetery Mangarelane HIGH
CE-02 Cultural Cemetery Mangarelane HIGH
CE-03 Cultural Cemetery Chipongo HIGH
CE-04 Cultural Cemetery Chipongo HIGH
CE-05 Cultural Cemetery Chipongo HIGH
CE-06 Cultural Cemetery Chipongo HIGH
CE-07 Cultural Cemetery Mapanzene HIGH
CE-08 Cultural Cemetery Mapanzene HIGH
CE-09 Cultural Cemetery Mapanzene HIGH
CE-10 Cultural Cemetery Mapanzene HIGH
CE-11 Cultural Cemetery Mapanzene HIGH
CE-12 Cultural Cemetery Mapanzene HIGH
CE-13 Cultural Cemetery Mabime HIGH
CE-14 Cultural Cemetery Mabime HIGH
CE-15 Cultural Cemetery Mabime HIGH
CE-16 Cultural Cemetery Mabime HIGH
CE-17 Cultural Cemetery Mabime HIGH
CE-18 Cultural Cemetery Mabime HIGH
CE-19 Cultural Cemetery Mangugumete HIGH
CE-20 Cultural Cemetery Mangugumete HIGH
CE-21 Cultural Cemetery Mangugumete HIGH
CE-22 Cultural Cemetery Manusse HIGH
CE-23 Cultural Cemetery Manusse HIGH
CE-24 Cultural Cemetery Manusse HIGH
CE-25 Cultural Cemetery Chitsotso HIGH
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
54
Site ID Site Type Description Location Valuation
CE-26 Cultural Cemetery Chitsotso HIGH
SF-01 Cultural Sacred Forest,
surrounding Sacred
Tree (ST-02)
Mabime HIGH
SF-02 Cultural Sacred Forest
contains cemetery
(CE-21)
Mangugumete HIGH
SF-03 Cultural Sacred Forest Manusse HIGH
SF-04 Cultural Sacred Forest,
contains cemetery
(CE-25)
Chitsotso HIGH
SF-05 Cultural Sacred Forest Mapenzene HIGH
SP-01 Cultural Sacred Pool Mabime HIGH
ST-01 Cultural Sacred Tree -
Baobab Tree
Mangarelane HIGH
ST-02 Cultural Sacred Tree -
'Massaleira', burial
site of first King,
within Sacred
Forest (SF-01)
Mabime HIGH
ST-03 Cultural Sacred Tree Manusse HIGH
ST-04 Cultural Sacred Tree Chitsotso HIGH
MP-01 Cultural Medicinal Plants Mabime MEDIUM
MP-02 Cultural Medicinal Plants Mapanzene MEDIUM
MP-03 Cultural Medicinal Plants Chipongo MEDIUM
N/A Cultural All Churches All Villages LOW
5.0 IMPACT ASSESSMENT
5.1 Assessment methodology and rating criteria
Potential impacts are assessed according to the direction, intensity (or severity), duration, extent and probability
of occurrence of the impact. These criteria are discussed in more detail below:
Direction of an impact may be positive, neutral or negative with respect to the particular impact. A positive
impact is one which is considered to represent an improvement on the baseline or introduces a positive change.
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
55
A negative impact is an impact that is considered to represent an adverse change from the baseline or
introduces a new undesirable factor.
Intensity / Severity is a measure of the degree of change in a measurement or analysis (e.g. the concentration
of a metal in water compared to the water quality guideline value for the metal), and is classified as none,
negligible, low, moderate or high. The categorisation of the impact intensity may be based on a set of criteria
(e.g. health risk levels, ecological concepts and/or professional judgment). The specialist study must attempt to
quantify the intensity and outline the rationale used. Appropriate, widely-recognised standards are used as a
measure of the level of impact.
Duration refers to the length of time over which an environmental impact may occur: i.e. transient (less than 1
year), short-term (1 to 5 years), medium term (6 to 15 years), long-term (greater than 15 years with impact
ceasing after closure of the project) or permanent.
Scale/Geographic extent refers to the area that could be affected by the impact and is classified as site, local,
regional, national, or international. The reference is not only to physical extent but may include extent in a more
abstract sense, such as an impact with regional policy implications which occurs at local level.
Probability of occurrence is a description of the probability of the impact actually occurring as improbable
(less than 5% chance), low probability (5% to 40% chance), medium probability (40 % to 60 % chance), highly
probable (most likely, 60% to 90% chance) or definite (impact will definitely occur).
Impact significance will be rated using the scoring system shown in Table 7 below. The significance of impacts
is assessed for the two main phases of the project: i) construction ii) operations. While a somewhat subjective
term, it is generally accepted that significance is a function of the magnitude of the impact and the likelihood
(probability) of the impact occurring. Impact magnitude is a function of the extent, duration and severity of the
impact, as shown in Table 7.
Table 7: Scoring system for evaluating impacts
Severity Duration Extent Probability
10 (Very high/don’t know)
5 (Permanent) 5 (International) 5 (Definite/don’t know)
8 (High) 4 (Long-term – longer than 15 years and impact ceases after closure of activity)
4 (National) 4 (Highly probable)
6 (Moderate) 3 (Medium-term- 6 to 15 years) 3 (Regional) 3 (Medium probability)
4 (Low) 2 (Short-term - 1 to 5 years) 2 (Local) 2 (Low probability)
2 (Minor) 1 (Transient – less than 1 year) 1 (Site) 1 (Improbable)
1 (None) 0 (None)
After ranking these criteria for each impact, a significance rating was calculated using the following formula:
SP (significance points) = (severity + duration + extent) x probability.
The maximum value is 100 significance points (SP). The potential environmental impacts were then rated as of
High (SP >75), Moderate (SP 46 – 75), Low (SP ≤15 - 45) or Negligible (SP < 15) significance, both with and
without mitigation measures in accordance with Table 8.
Table 8: Impact significance rating
Value Significance Comment
SP >75 Indicates high environmental significance
Where an accepted limit or standard may be exceeded, or large magnitude impacts occur to highly valued/sensitive resource/receptors. Impacts of high significance would typically influence the decision to proceed with the project.
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
56
Value Significance Comment
SP 46 - 75
Indicates moderate environmental significance
Where an effect will be experienced, but the impact magnitude is sufficiently small and well within accepted standards, and/or the receptor is of low sensitivity/value. Such an impact is unlikely to have an influence on the decision. Impacts may justify significant modification of the project design or alternative mitigation.
SP 15 - 45 Indicates low environmental significance
Where an effect will be experienced, but the impact magnitude is small and is within accepted standards, and/or the receptor is of low sensitivity/value or the probability of impact is extremely low. Such an impact is unlikely to have an influence on the decision although impact should still be reduced as low as possible, particularly when approaching moderate significance.
SP < 15
Indicates negligible environmental significance
Where a resource or receptor will not be affected in any material way by a particular activity or the predicted effect is deemed to be imperceptible or is indistinguishable from natural background levels. No mitigation is required.
+ Positive impact Where positive consequences / effects are likely.
In addition to the above rating criteria, the terminology used in this assessment to describe impacts arising from
the current project are outlined in Table 9 below. In order to fully examine the potential changes that the project
might produce, the project area can be divided into Areas of Direct Influence (ADI) and Areas of Indirect
Influence (AII).
Direct impacts are defined as changes that are caused by activities related to the project and they occur
at the same time and place where the activities are carried out i.e. within the ADI.
Indirect impacts are those changes that are caused by project-related activities, but are felt later in time
and outside the ADI. The secondary indirect impacts are those which are as a result of activities outside
of the ADI.
Table 9: Types of impact
Term for Impact Nature Definition
Direct impact
Impacts that result from a direct interaction between a planned project
activity and the receiving environment/receptors (i.e. destruction of an
archaeological feature or sacred site).
Indirect impact
Secondary impacts that result from project activity and affect the
environment in which the receiving receptor is experienced (i.e. an
increase in noise/dust at a sacred site, a loss of access to cultural sites).
Cumulative impact
Impacts that act together with other impacts (including those from
concurrent or planned activities) to affect the same resources and/or
receptors as the project.
The criteria used for assessing severity are:
None/Minor – negligible or no change in archaeological heritage elements; negligible or no change in the
setting or condition of a cultural/sacred site, and no anticipated change in related cultural practice;
Low - changes to key archaeological elements so that the asset is slightly altered; there is a low level
change to a cultural/sacred site (i.e., small part of the site, or its value, is lost. Slight changes to the use,
setting and/or accessibility; slight changes to local cultural traditions;
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
57
Moderate - changes to many key archaeological elements such that the resource is clearly modified and
information is lost; there is a medium level change to a cultural/sacred site’s setting or condition i.e. a
notable portion is lost or damaged , considerable changes to use, setting, and/or accessibility; changes to
local cultural traditions so that they are noticeably modified; and
High/Very High - changes to key archaeological elements such that the resource is totally altered or
removed; changes to a cultural/sacred site so that it is wholly lost or altered to such a degree that it loses
its function, and the cultural norm cannot continue.
Professional judgement (including a consideration of site value) has been used to determine between noneand
minor and high and very high.
5.2 Identified impacts
5.2.1 Construction phase impacts
Table 10 presents a description of potential impacts to cultural heritage during the construction phase.
Table 10: Potential construction phase impacts to cultural heritage
Potential
Impact
Description of potential construction impact
Change to the
land surface
Land will be cleared (e.g. of medicinal plants), levelled, excavated and compacted (as a
result of vehicle movements). Surface material (artefacts) will be re-deposited, damaged
or destroyed as a result of any ground works. Sites of cultural significance (e.g. sacred
trees, sacred forest) will be destroyed. Subsurface remains (e.g. burials) will be compacted
and damaged by vehicles.
Ground
Pollution
Physical pollution can arise from construction-related materials or other non-natural
materials. Damage to archaeological deposits and/or sites of natural/cultural significance
(e.g. sacred water courses) could also occur as a result of construction vehicle fuel spillage
or leakage.
Change in
Environmental
Setting
Construction activity can result in increased noise levels, dust and visual disturbance. The
physical setting of a cultural or religious site (e.g. sacred area) could be disturbed as a
result. Intangible cultural heritage practice may also be affected consequently.
Demographic
changes
Construction activity in the area may instigate demographic change (e.g., increased income,
education, healthcare and in-migration) and can affect change in local belief systems and
intangible heritage.
Changes to the land surface
Archaeological Sites
There are no known archaeological sites located within an area expected to be impacted by a change to the
land surface. All known archaeological sites are located sufficiently distant from project infrastructure to be
unaffected, or are located adjacent to existing roads, which will not be widened. There is potential, however,
for unknown archaeological sites, which may exist beneath the surface or as undiscovered surface scatters, to
be directly impacted during site preparation and construction works through changes to land surface. In the
worst-case scenario (pre-mitigation), this could result in a very high severity, permanent, internationally
significant impact.
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
58
Cultural Sites
There are a number of cultural sites that could potentially be directly impacted by changes to land surface.
These include those located along the southern transport route option, which is to be widened and improved,
and those along the proposed overhead electricity transmission line. Potentially impacted sites comprise:
Burials – BU-110 and BU-111 (transport route), and BU-105, BU-106, BU-107, BU-108 and BU-109
(powerline);
Cemeteries – CE-18, CE-106 and CE-107 (transport route), and CE-104 and CE-105 (powerline);
Churches – CH-107 and CH-108 (transport route); and
Sacred Places – SF-01, ST-02 and SP-01 (transport route).
In the worst-case (pre-mitigation), this could result in a very high severity, permanent impact at high value sites
(burials, cemeteries and sacred places).
There is also potential for accidental damage to unknown or undiscovered cultural sites (e.g. undiscovered
burial or an undisclosed sacred site). In the worst-case (pre-mitigation), this could result in a very high severity,
permanent impact at high value sites.
Mitigation
The potential for impacting currently undiscovered archaeological remains will be mitigated through the
immediate preparation and adherence to a Chance Find Procedure (CFP) in accordance with Mozambican
heritage legislation. The CFP will form a component of the Cultural Heritage Management Plan (CHMP), which
will seek to manage and monitor all cultural heritage effects for the project’s lifetime. The CFP must be updated
during the lifetime of the project to make provisions for a course of action in the event that artefacts are accidently
disturbed. The law states that assets must be disclosed to the local authority within 48 hours of discovery. The
CFP will meet requirements for accidental cultural heritage disturbance as stipulated by both IFC and
Mozambican Law. The CFP will be presented to the relevant local authority for approval. If significant
archaeological remains are discovered, the need for excavation and ‘preservation through record’ may be
required. In this case, the loss of in situ preservation of archaeological remains would be balanced by improved
understanding of the archaeological record in a relatively understudied region.
Impacts to the identified cultural sites can be avoided by selecting the northern transport route (which already
exists and requires no widening), and through re-alignment of the proposed overhead electricity transmission
line, so as to avoid the identified burial and cemetery sites. It will be paramount that the Proponent continues
to engage with the local community so as to avoid and accidental direct damage to unmarked (and unrecorded)
graves along existing road routes and / or other previously unidentified cultural sites in the vicinity. The CHMP
should include measures for dialogue during the construction phase between the Proponent and local
community in relation to the avoidance of unmarked graves and previously unknown cultural assets.
Ground Pollution
There are six natural sacred places, three cemeteries three locations of traditional medical practice and one
archaeological site located in close proximity to project infrastructure that may be impacted by the release of
pollution to the environment. Sites SF-02, SP-102, SP-105, CE-19, CE-20, CE-21, MP-101, MP-102, MP-103
and AR-103 are all located adjacent to the existing R241 and EN1 roads (northern access route option). Sites
SF-01, ST-02 and SP-01 are located along the proposed southern access route. As such, the potential for
project related pollution is limited to spillages or leakage from construction vehicles. Sacred watercourses in
particular, may be damaged in such a way that prevents normal cultural activity from resuming.
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
59
In the case of the three sites along the southern access route, it is already predicted that, if construction of that
route were to go ahead, these sites could be destroyed or damaged. If they were to survive direct disturbance
from construction activity, the potential impact of ground pollution could act cumulatively to impact these sites.
In the worst-case (pre-mitigation), this could result in a high severity, permanent, local, impact at high value
sites (sacred places).
Mitigation
Impacts to SF-01, ST-02 and SP-01 can be voided by selecting the northern transport route (which already
exists and requires no widening).
Ground pollution impacts will be mitigated through regular vehicle maintenance, in keeping with best practice
on pollution prevention. An Emergency Response Plan will be prepared to react to accidental spillages from
construction vehicles. The CHMP should also include measures for long-term dialogue between the Proponent
and local community in relation to the environmental monitoring of sacred places (watercourses).
Change in Environmental Setting
There are no assets in close proximity to the proposed power plant site, and so no impacts from noise, air or
visual disturbance are anticipated. There are also no impacts from a change in environmental setting anticipated
at the burial and cemetery sites along the proposed electricity transmission line as a result of air emissions
during construction (assuming the alignment of the route is altered to avoid direct disturbance, as discussed
above).
Cultural sites adjacent to the proposed transport route, are expected to experience noise, air and visual impacts
as a result of construction traffic. This will be limited to the construction period, and will only occur during
delivery of equipment and materials. Potentially impacted sites comprise:
Burials – BU-110 and BU-111 (high value);
Cemeteries – CE-18, CE-19, CE-20, CE-21, CE-106 and CE-107 (high value);
Churches – CH-102, CH-106, CH-107 and CH-108 (low - medium)
Sacred Places – SF-01, F-02, ST-02, SP-01, SP-102 and SP-105 (high);
Locations of Traditional Medical Practice (MP-101, MP-102 and MP-103).
In the worst-case (pre-mitigation), this could result in a moderate severity, short term, local, impact at high value
sites (sacred places).
Mitigation
The CHMP should include plans to monitor changes to the environmental setting during the construction phase
of those assets highlighted above. This may also include measures for the demarcation of sensitive areas (e.g.
roadside sites) to prevent accidental damage via the laydown of materials etc. during construction and/or
additional planting or screening to protect sites. The full requirements of the CHMP are summarised below.
Change in Demographics
It is anticipated that elements of intangible cultural heritage are susceptible to impacts resulting from
demographic change (specifically influx), particularly during construction when a large proportion of the required
skilled workforce will need to be sourced from outside the area. It is expected this influx will be limited to the
construction period. This issue is considered in broader terms in the Social specialist report (i.e. beyond the
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
60
impact solely on intangible cultural heritage), and details on mitigation (e.g. an Influx Management Plan) are
presented in that report.
It is difficult to predict exactly how and when changes to intangible heritage will occur and some cultural change
is inevitable. During the construction phase, the influx of workers or those seeking indirect benefits and socio-
economic impacts that may result, together with any loss of access or changes in environmental setting of sites
used for traditional activities, is likely to have an impact. Selecting the severity of this impact is subjective, with
deviation from the local cultural norm perceived as either positive or negative by different people. Furthermore,
an influx of migrants may either strengthen or weaken local cultural practices over the project lifetime.
If impacts were to occur, pre-mitigation, they would be of unknown and therefore, of very high severity (on a
worst case / don’t know basis), local and short - medium term in duration.
Mitigation
The CHMP should provide measures for the maintenance of community access to sacred sites and facilitate
respect for local intangible cultural heritage, tradition and taboos through continued community liaison. It is
suggested that the presence of culturally significant places are highlighted to contractors and sub-contractors
during the site induction process as project cultural awareness training.
Summary of General Cultural Heritage Mitigation
A CHMP should be developed by the Proponent to manage and monitor all cultural heritage effects for the
project’s lifetime in line with PS 8 and Mozambican heritage legislation (Law 10/1988 and Decree 27/1994).
The CHMP should include:
The preparation of a project-specific, ‘site ready’ Chance Find Procedure (CFP) to detail the requirements
of the Mozambican Archaeological Heritage Protection Regulations (Decree 27/1994) which enforce the
reporting of any archaeological assets to the local authority within 48 hours of discovery . The CFP will
set out the course of action to be followed in the event that any cultural heritage artefacts are recovered.
The CFP should be provided to all contractors and consultants on the project site during all construction
activity and incorporated within the project’s ‘site induction’ process. It will remain in place for the lifetime
of the project.
Demarcation of ‘no go’ sensitive areas e.g. sacred forests, sacred trees, sacred pools, medicinal bush,
cemeteries (i.e. mitigation by avoidance). Although these sites may not be directly affected by construction
activities there is a potential for disturbance of community access routes to cultural sites and to the
environmental setting of the sites themselves;
Enhancement or protection of environmental setting may be required and should be discussed in
conjunction with local community e.g. through planting/screening;
It may be necessary to demarcate of areas to be avoided (e.g. by noisy, dust-inductive) construction
vehicles at certain times of the day/year so as to avoid disturbance of traditional ceremonial activities in
close proximity of construction routes;
Maintaining community access to sacred sites and facilitating respect for local intangible cultural heritage,
tradition and taboo will ensure that the negative socio-cultural effects are effectively managed – regular
platforms for community liaison are recommended in this regard. It is suggested that the presence of
culturally significant places are highlighted to contractors at any early stage, e.g. during site induction.
Continued liaison between the Proponent and local cultural leaders to facilitate the identification of any
cultural sites not yet shared by the community and potentially affected by the proposed project. The CHMP
must set out plans for stakeholder identification and a programme for long term consultation in this regard.
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
61
Table 11 presents the assessment of impacts during the construction phase
Table 11: Impact assessment table – construction phase
Indicator of potential impact
Pre-mitigation Post-mitigation
Sev
erit
y
Du
rati
on
Ext
ent
Pro
bab
ility
Sig
nif
ican
ce
Sev
erit
y
Du
rati
on
Ext
ent
Pro
bab
ility
Sig
nif
ican
ce
Impact of changes to land surface on undiscovered archaeological remains (worst
case)
10 5 5 5 High
100 10 5 5 2
Low
40
Impact of changes to land surface on cultural sites
10 5 2 5 High
85 10 5 2 2
Low
34
Impact of ground pollution
8 5 2 2 Low
30 8 5 2 1
Low
15
Impact of change in environmental setting
6 2 2 4 Low
40 6 2 2 1
Negligible
10
Impact of demographic change
10 2 2 4 Moderate
56 6 2 2 2
Low
20
5.2.2 Operational phase impacts
There are no direct impacts anticipated on tangible cultural heritage sites during the operational phase. Impacts
upon intangible cultural heritage, in particular through demographic changes (influx), are anticipated to be
limited due to the small number of jobs associated with the operational phase and the likelihood that these will
be primarily sourced from the local population. The CHMP should provide mitigation for this, and will provide
measures for the maintenance of community access to sacred sites and facilitate respect for local intangible
cultural heritage, tradition and taboos through continued community liaison. It is suggested that the presence
of culturally significant places are highlighted to contractors and sub-contractors during the site induction
process as project cultural awareness training
Once constructed, the environmental setting of burials and cemeteires along the electricity transmission route
(BU-105 – BU-109, and CE-104 and CE-105) could be impacted by noise and visual effects as result of the
overhead powerlines. Pre-mitigation, this could result in a moderate severity, long term, local impact at high
value sites. It is proposed that the noise impact would be mitigated by re-aligning the route to avoid these
burials (which is already recommended during the construction phase).
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
62
These impacts are summarised in Table 12.
Table 12: Impact assessment table – operation phase
Indicator of potential impact
Pre-mitigation Post-mitigation
Sev
erit
y
Du
rati
on
Ext
ent
Pro
bab
ility
Sig
nif
ican
ce
Sev
erit
y
Du
rati
on
Ext
ent
Pro
bab
ility
Sig
nif
ican
ce
Impact of change in environmental setting
6 4 2 4 Moderate
48 4 4 2 4
Low
40
Impact of demographic
change 4 4 2 4
Low
40 2 4 2 2
Low
16
5.2.3 Decommissioning phase impacts
It is considered that impacts during decommissioning will be limited to changes to environmental setting, and
will be similar to those predicted for construction.
6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PLAN Table 13: Environmental Action Plan
Aspect Potential
Impact
Impact Source Detailed Actions Responsibility
Cultural
Heritage
Destruction of
archaeological
remains
Changes to land
surface
Preparation of CFP.
Adherence to CFP.
Golder to
prepare CFP.
Proponent to
adhere.
Cultural
Heritage
Destruction of
cultural sites
Changes to land
surface
Review design options to avoid
impact. Preference is northern
transport route, and to re-align
powerline. Adherence to
CHMP
Golder to
prepare CHMP.
Proponent to
adhere.
Cultural
Heritage
Damage to
cultural heritage
through leaks
from vehicles
Ground pollution Ensure all vehicles well
maintained. Prepare
Emergency Response Plan
and Adherence to CHMP
Golder to
prepare CHMP.
Proponent to
adhere.
Cultural
Heritage
Damage to
cultural heritage
All activities Preparation of CHMP.
Adherence to CHMP.
Golder to
prepare.
Proponent to
adhere.
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
63
7.0 CONCLUSIONS
Baseline cultural heritage conditions for the proposed CTT power plant were established through systematic
survey, community consultation and desk-based study. A total of 87 sites were identified by the baseline study
within the study area, as well as 10 located outside the study area within the Inhambane region.
An assessment of potential impacts indicates that, without mitigation, there is potential for high significance
impacts (in a worst –case scenario) on cultural heritage sites during construction as a result of direct disturbance
from changes in the land surface. Mitigation measures, including selection of the northern access route, re-
alignment of the electricity transmission line and development of a robust Chance Finds Procedure, reduce this
impact.
A moderate significance impact is possible on intangible cultural heritage during construction as a result of
demographic changes. This will be managed through the Cultural Heritage Management Plan.
A moderate significance impact is predicted during operation at burials along the proposed transmission line
route, as a result of noise and visual effects upon their environmental setting. Sensitive re-alignment of the
route, as required by the construction mitigation measures, will reduce this impact.
8.0 SPECIALIST RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the northern transport route is selected, but there is no preference for beach landing site
or technology from a cultural heritage perspective.
9.0 GLOSSARY
Archaeological Site: Any locality where traces of old human activities are evident (i.e., accumulation of
artefacts, remains of buildings and structures, as well as the associated presence of organic elements,
rock paintings, etc.);
Chance Find Procedure: The chance find procedure is a project-specific procedure that outlines what will
happen if previously unknown heritage resources, particularly archaeological resources, are encountered
during project construction or operation (PS 8 Guidance Note, IFC 2012);
Critical Cultural Heritage: The internationally recognised heritage of communities who use, or have used
within living memory, the cultural heritage for long-standing purposes. It also applies to legally protect
cultural heritage areas and those proposed for such designated status (IFC 2012);
Cultural Heritage: Defined in accordance to IFC PS 8 (2012) and protected, in conjunction with their
immediate setting, by Mozambican Law (10/1988) - to include (i) tangible forms e.g. objects, pottery, sites
and structures with archaeological (prehistoric), paleontological, historical, cultural, artistic or religious
values; (ii) natural features which embody cultural values e.g. sacred groves, water bodies, rocks; and (iii)
the intangible cultural heritage of communities e.g. festivals, taboos, oral history;
Field Survey: A non-intrusive walkover exercise to identify cultural heritage sites and related objects
through visual surface inspection;
Intangible or Immaterial Cultural Heritage: The traditional practices, cultural norms and knowledge
transmitted from one generation to the next, which communities or individuals recognise as part of their
cultural heritage e.g. belief systems, cultural taboos, songs and dances, language, medicinal knowledge
(IFC, 2012 and Mozambican Law (10/1988));
Cultural Heritage: The traditional practices, cultural norms and knowledge transmitted from one
generation to the next, which communities or individuals recognise as part of their cultural heritage e.g.
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
64
belief systems, cultural taboos, songs and dances, language, medicinal knowledge (IFC, 2012 and
Mozambican Law (10/1988));
Immovable Cultural Heritage: archaeological sites (e.g. stone- walled ‘Zimbabwe’ enclosures), historic
buildings, ancient cities, historic buildings and natural features embodying cultural values etc.
(Mozambique Law 10/1988);
Non-Replicable Cultural Assets: Non-replicable cultural heritage may relate to the social, economic,
cultural, environmental, and climatic conditions of past peoples, their evolving ecologies, adaptive
strategies, and early forms of environmental management, where the (i) cultural heritage is unique or
relatively unique for the period it represents, or (ii) cultural heritage is unique or relatively unique in linking
several periods in the same site (IFC, 2012);
Material Remains: Objects produced by man, as stone or iron instruments or artefacts, ceramics, kitchen
remains, construction, building and works remains, amongst others;
Moveable Cultural Heritage: Cultural heritage objects (e.g. stone tools, ethnographic artefacts) used in
cultural expression, intangible heritage captured on film (Mozambique Law 10/1988);
Preservation in situ: To preserve in the same place where the archaeological material was found and
within its primary or secondary context; and
Replicable Cultural Assets: Tangible forms of cultural heritage that can themselves be moved to another
location or that can be replaced by a similar structure or natural features to which the cultural values can
be transferred by appropriate measures. Archaeological or historical sites may be considered replicable
where the particular eras and cultural values they represent are well represented by other sites and/or
structures (IFC, 2012).
10.0 REFERENCES
Adamowicz, L. 1987. “Projecto Cipriana”, 1981-1985: contribuição para o conhecimento da arqueologia
entre os rios Lúrio e Ligonha, Província de Nampula. In: Departamento De Arqueologia E Antropologia.
Adamowicz, L. 2011b, Relatório sobre a Prospecção Arqueológica de Salvaguarda, Distrito do Mabote,
IMPACTO/SASOL.
Adamowicz, L and Nhatule, E J J, 2015. Cultural Heritage Survey Report, Govuro, Inhassoro and
Vilankulos Districts 12 – 21 January, 2015.
Burra Charter 1999. The Australian ICOMOS Charter for the Conservation of Places of Cultural
Significance . Australia ICOMOS.
Deacon, H.J. e Deacon, J. 1999. Human beginnings in South Africa: uncovering the secrets of the Stone
Age. Cape Town: David Philip Publishers.
Golder Associates. 2014. Environmental Impact Assessment for Sasol PSA and LPG Project: Cultural
Heritage Impact Assessment. Unpublished doc: 1302793 – 10712.
IFC, 2012. Performance Standard 8, Cultural Heritage.
Macamo, S. 2006. Privileged places in South Central Mozambique. Uppsala: Uppsala University.
Mitchell, P. 2002. The archaeology of southern Africa. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Morais, 1988, The Early Farming Communities of Southern Mozambique, Eduardo Mondlane University,
Mozambique
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
65
Rrequal, Ancient & Golder Associados Moҫambique Ltd, 2014, PSA Development and LPG Project -
Cultural Heritage Report
Senna-Martinez, Martins, Castelo and Evangelista, 2013, Early Iron Age Spread into Northern
Mozambique: Revising the data from the Mozambique Anthropological Missions (1946), Instituto de
Investigação Científica e Tropical
Sinclair, P. 1987. Um reconhecimento Archaeological do Norte de Moçambique. In: Kaleidoscopio
Pesquisa em Comunicação e Cultura.
Sinclair,P., Morais, J., Adamowicz, L., Duarte,R., 1993, A perspective on archaeological research in
Mozambique. In The Archaeology of Africa, Food, metals and towns. Ed,. Thurstan Shaw, Paul Sinclair,
Bassey Andah, Alex Okpoko, London and New York, pp 410-431
Website accessed - 11/09/18:
http://whc.unesco.org/en/tentativelists/919/
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
66
Signature Page
Golder Associates (UK) Ltd
Conor Ryan Paul Wheelhouse
Cultural Heritage Consultant Senior Cultural Heritage Consultant
CR/AS/up
Company Registered in England No.1125149.
At Attenborough House, Browns Lane Business Park, Stanton-on-the-Wolds, Nottinghamshire NG12 5BL
VAT No. 209 0084 92
Golder and the G logo are trademarks of Golder Associates Corporation
g:\projects\18103533 - sasol mgip esia\6. deliverables\final client deliverables - for wbg & pp meetings nov'18\final documents\word\18103533-321152-
20_rep_ctt_cultural_heritage_final_26112018.docx
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
67
APPENDIX A
Patrimoz Serviços de Consultoria
Field Notes
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
68
APPENDIX A.1: COMMUNITY INTERVIEW QUESTION (IN PORTUGUESE)
Amostra das Perguntas da Etrevista Comunitária
Objectivos:
Devemos identificar e proteger toda a gama de bens do património cultural, conforme definido pela IFC:
i) formas tangíveis do património cultural, tais como objectos tangíveis móveis ou imóveis, propriedade,
estruturais sítios ou grupos de estruturas, que possuem os valores arqueológicos (pré-histórico),
paleontológicos, históricos, culturais, artísticos e religiosos;
ii) características naturais ou objectos tangíveis que encarnam valores culturais, tais como bosques
sagrados, pedras, lagos e cachoeiras; e
iii) determinadas casos das formas de cultura intangíveis que propõem-se a ser usado para fins comerciais,
tais como o conhecimento cultural, inovações e práticas das comunidades que consagra o estilo da vida tradicional, (IFC, Performance Standard 8, 2012).
Em ordem para conhecer IFC directrizes o comunidades local para a projecto deve ser consultado com
em conta para seus cultural património em um esforço para capturar estes elementos, especificamente:
▪ Túmulos/cemitérios: todos os religiões. Pode ser individuais, comunal etc.
▪ História do assentamentos/povoamento região: história oral por exemplo: Quando aldeia
foi fundada?
▪ Sítios da importância cultural local: Assim podem ser as igrejas ou mesquitas e/ou sítios naturais
ou locais que tem significado local por exemplo floresta: sagrada, pedras, árvores, plantas
medicinais, lagos e lugares onde ocorrem as cerimónias, rituais, objectos de adoração, etc.
▪ Património Cultural Intangível: práticas tradicional (circuncisão, ritos de
niciação), actividades, cerimónias relacionados para um evento particular (chuva? doença?),
regras (tabus) para lugares particular (restritos aos homens , mulheres, adolescentes, só?).
Estes sítios precisam ser localizados, gravados (com sensibilidade, e licença da comunidade local) e
descritos de modo sistemático que futuramente podiam ser protegido e/ou mitigados. Registo de detalhes
do património intangível quer dizer que as regras que regem nestes lugares são respeitados; tabus não
seriam quebrado por empregados do SASOL etc.; e uma linha basíca das normas culturais foram
registados.
Os estudos anterior realizados por Golder Associates nas proximidades do Projectos SASOL teriam
sido identificados:
▪ Cemitérios e túmulos;
▪ Igrejas;
▪ Plantas Medicinais;
▪ Lagos Sagrados;
▪ Árvores Sagrados;
▪ Floresta Sagradas; e
▪ Histórias orais e Património Intangível ( actividade tradicionais animísticas, sitios tabu, etc.).
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
69
Metodologia
Em conjunto e parceria com o CLO, os lideres comunitários podem ser entrevistados. Pode ser que os próprios
membros da comunidade são portadores duma informação chave para uma apropriada entrevista do que como
um grupo discussão). O CLO deve identificar pessoas certas em cada Comunidade.
Amostra Perguntas
Data/Tempo: ______________________________ Aldeia/Nome: __________________________________
Entrevistador: _____________________________ Entrevistado: _________________________________
Posição: (por exemplo, Ancião/chefe ou membro comunidade)
(Iniciar pela introdução ao trabalhar – por exemplo, "Gostaríamos conhecer a história, o património cultural e
importante lugares desta vila/zona/aldeia, para certificar que eles são mantidos na memória, respeitados
localmente e protegidos pela autoridade... ")
a) História do assentamento:
▪ Você/Vocês nasceu/nasceram aqui? Quanto tempo vocês vivem aqui?
▪ (se originalmente estiver de outro lugar –Donde, quando e porque você venha aqui?)
▪ Nós estamos interessados na história da aldeia, se você podia contar algo interessante e útil para
nós, por favor?
▪ Qual é origem e significado do nome da aldeia?
▪ Conhecem qualquer histórias sobre o fundadores/os primeiros colonos? Você sabe quem eles
foram e donde chegaram?
▪ Você sabe a idade deste povoamento?
▪ Existem qualquer outras interessante histórias sobre outros assentamentos nesta área?
b) Cemitérios/sepulturas/túmulos:
▪ Há qualquer sepulturas nas proximidades? Numerosas?
➢ Por favor, você pode indicar-me o caminho?
Por favor registar:
▪ Ponto (s) GPS com um estimativa da superfície do sítio;
▪ Fotografa (se a permissão foi concedido);
▪ Qual são confissões nesta área? Você é cristão, muçulmano ou confessa uma das religiões
sincréticas ou tradicionais?
▪ É activo ou velho?
▪ Onde pratica-se enterros nas aldeias – Eles são próxima de cada propriedade? O que se faz
quando cemitério já não tem lugar para mais enterros? Onde e como então será escolhido
novo lugar?
▪ Há enterros/túmulos ao longo das estradas?
▪ Quem é o Guardião dos sítios (são eles mantido/visitados regularmente)?
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
70
c) Igrejas/mesquitas:
▪ São lá qualquer igrejas ou mesquitas nas proximidades? Como muitos?
➢ Por favor, pode Você mostrar me?
Por favor registar:
▪ Coordenadas GPS e nome de edifício?
▪ Fotografia. Do património imóvel;
▪ Quem usa-los?
▪ Por quantas pessoas?
▪ Quem é Guardião do sitio?
d) Floresta e sítios sagrados:
▪ Precisamos ter a certeza que todos sítios de valor tradicional, cultural e religioso encontram-se
são protegidos. Precisamos estar cientes da existência de alguns sítios de alto valor natural e
significativos nesta área, incluindo árvores sagrados, florestas e lagos. Por favor pode você dizer
me algo mais sobre o assunto e ajudar- me registar a sua localização? Nós, vamos-lhe garantir
que estes locais serão mantidos em 'segredo' se é necessário e apenas o pessoal que realizara
o projecto da infra-estrutura saberá sobre isso para proteger a área e evitar qualquer tipo da
modificação.
Por favor registar:
➢ Sítio é segredo/confidential?
➢ Coordenadas GPS - ponto (s) com um estimativa da extensão do sítio; p. ex. 5m da
distância a partir do lugar protegido;
➢ Descrição de ambiente do sítio e sua configuração; p. ex. nestes prazos: mato, mato
denso, floresta; lugar silencioso ou barulhento;
➢ Fotografia (se uma permissão será concedida);
➢ Quem é em carga deste site (regulo, líder comunitário, guardião?);
➢ Quem frequenta o sítio? Quantas vezes? C;
➢ Como as pessoas chegam até lá? (Qual é rota mais acessível?);
➢ É antigo ou novo?;
➢ Estão associados ao sítio qualquer tipo de regras/tabus? P. ex. se admite os homens
junto com as mulheres a aquele sítio? Crianças?
➢ Há qualquer tipo de cerimónias /actividades que decorrem fora deste
sítio? (como muitas vezes? Por quê?)
e) Património intangível:
▪ Há qualquer tipo de festivais tradicional que têm lugar nesta aldeia? Quando? Onde? Quem
organiza?
▪ Há qualquer especial cerimónias que tem lugar aqui , para exemplo, a circuncisão, ritos de
iniciação, um criança é doente ou acontece um problema com agricultura/pesca?
(Se Sim – por favor pode você Mostrar me , que etc.).
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
71
▪ Há qualquer regras de acesso Você pode ter para específicos lugares (tabus)? Por
exemplo são homens e mulheres permitido? Crianças?
▪ Há qualquer tipo de plantas medicinais usado para a cura? Onde eles se encontram? (Por
favor, pode Você indicar-me ou mostrar?
▪ Localizar com GPS e regista como um sítio cultural).
Por favor agradecer o entrevistado da sua parte.
Outros elementos de património intangível pode se relacionar com as religiões (cultos) tradicionais,
música, danças, língua, vestuário e tradicional industrial actividade (p. ex., produção da cerâmica,
técnicas da pesca etc.)
Este é uma guia, com base na anterior experiência na área - por favor adiciona mais se você considera
algo apropriado.
Questionário Sobre o Património Cultural Tangivel, Intangivel e Manifestações Culturais
Perguntas e temas de conversa
1) Cavernas, grutas, furnas ou abrigos naturais, que possivelmente tenham sido habitados por povos
desaparecidos, antepassados ou servido de necrópole ou que apenas mostrem condições de
habilidade;
2) Pinturas rupestres, quer nas paredes das cavernas. lapas ou abrigos naturais, quer em simples
rochedos, que indiquem silhuetas humanas ou de animais ou primitivos desenhos, embora sem
plausível explicação;
3) Construções de caracter antigo, como recintos amuralhados, torres ou simples atalaias, parapeitos,
fossos ou ruinas de qualquer natureza;
4) Sepulturas de populações e lugares sagrados;
5) Oficinas de produção de olaria ou esculturas;
6) Restos fossilizados de animais terrestres, embora em pequena quantidade ou marinhos, como
conchas ou ainda vegetais, supostos relacionados com a existência do Homem ou,
presumivelmente, contemporâneos de espécies/”raças” humanas extintas;
7) Concentração dos cacos de olaria, carvão ou escória de fundição de ferro na superfície;
8) Estações com instrumentos líticos, de qualquer época passada, quer lascados quer polidos;
9) Locais de antigas explorações mineiras;
10) Locais onde se tenha feito a fundição de metais, especialmente o ferro, o que se conhece pela
presença das escórias e das extremidades dos bicos de barro cozido (alcaravizes), usados nas
pontas dos foles.
11) Quaisquer outras indicações julgadas convenientes que se refiram a locais fora da vossa área
administrativa ou de pessoas que possam dar bons esclarecimentos;
12) Existem nessa localidade qualquer casa arrecadação ou simples armários onde se tenham
recolhido objects de interesse pré-históricos ou arqueológicos?
13) Existem na vossa área/comunidade grupos de pessoas que dedicam-se exclusivamente da caça;
14) Conhece lugares onde decorrem as cerimónias dos ritos de iniciação e de circuncisão?
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
72
APPENDIX A.2: DIARY OF THE FIELD SURVEY
12/01/2015: Maps, Photos and Short Description
The travel with Mazda 4 x 4 along EN1 from Maputo (Airport Mavalane/EuropCar, 6:30) to Xai Xai, Maxixe
(Provincial Board of Culture and Education/Dept. of Cultural Heritage) Massingue, Vilankulos and Inhassoro
(Hotel Escola Estrela do Mar, 19:05). 760 km, 10 h 35 min. We turn out to Vilankulos for lunch and leave
credential from Ministry of Culture to the District Board of Cultural Heritage.
Plate 1:The vehicle used by survey team
Map 3. Showing itinerary Maputo/Vilankulos –
Inhassoro. January 1, 2015
Plate 2: (Estrada Nacional No. 1)
13/01/2015: Inhassoro – Guvuro. Maps, Photos and Short Description
The work start after breakfast at 8:00 with presentation of our credentials to the District Board of Cultural
Heritage, (DBCH) to director Raimundo Zefanias Tangue ([email protected]; [email protected];
+259 84287997) (See plate 23). Mr. Tangue shows us list of site recorded by him and his scouts, as cultural
heritage in Inhassoro District and appointed for us one field helper, fluent in ma-chuabo language. Because the
list of district heritage was rather very limited (1 cemetery, 1 mosque, 2 church, Maritime Delegation and “palace”
of administrator) we agree to cooperate more close in the future, exchanging information and data about cultural
heritage in Inhassoro District. Mr. Tangue is also the leader of the Circle of Interest of the Cultural Heritage
created by the League of Scouts of Mozambique.
This day field work, survey and records were concentrated to following localities, sites and points:
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
73
Name of surveyed locality or site
Site Description Easting UTM 36K
Northing UTM 36K
Elev.
H. Estrela do Mar Team Residence during field work of Sasol MGTP Project
728644 7616302 7 m
Brisa Mar Lodge Modern construction 730644 7613857 8 m
C. T. SETA Modern construction 728088 7617186 15 m
Maritime Delegate Modern construction but already partially in ruin
728427 7616763 9 m
Macovane Recent Adm. Post 711414 7620477 15 m
To Lago Sangene No archaeological evidence 702039 7629698 53 m
SP101
Lago Sangene
Sacred Place. The lake almost dry. No voluntiers to interview. No archaeological evidence
694159 7635550 59 m
EN1 (13) Along main road. No archaeological evidence 691677 7637046 63 m
CE101
Mombane Partially destroyed by river Savi 710066 7677891 13 m
CH101
Mambone
Church: Remarkable architecture. Need to be renovated. Interview with Catarina Alfredo
710833 7677943 6 m
AR101
Mambone 2
Archaeological Site, disturbed by river Save erosion. Systematic field survey.
711329 7678063 10 m
MO101
Old Mambone/ Guvuro
Mosque, In risk to be destroyed by fluvial erosion
710909 7677940 4 m
AR102
Mambone Save R
Archaeological almost totally disturbed by fluvial erosion. Interview with Catarina Alfredo
714602 7679717 7 m
With the guide, appointed by Mr. R. Tangue, young secondary school Mateus Nhaul we have visited and
surveyed:
Points indicated on the list of sites in proposed industrial infrastructure area in Inhassoro (between
touristic complex SETA to Briza Mar lodge) No archaeological evidence was recorded;
Modern church; and
Municipal cemetery:
On the way to EN1 and Macovane many 10 - 20 minute stop were done for walking survey in same
particularly interesting landscape (point on the map 54,76, 79, 57, Guvuro Bridge, 52, 53 and site as
proposed industrial infrastructure area) but no artefacts, evidence of land use in the past were find.
In southern part of Sangene lake, according to local tradition and records of District Board of Culture
Heritage, it is supposed to be sacred place and periodical practice of the initiation ritual of young boys for
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
74
Macovane area. The place also cannot be visited by pregnant women or photo taken. Our effort to find
somebody to interview was unsuccessful.
During the walking survey on the way to Macovane, survey 0871, 12, 13, 30 points and Sangene Lake no
archaeological evidence has been recorded.
In Guvuro (Nova Mambone) we have presented our credentials to the District Administrator of Nova
Mambone and after to District Board of Culture Heritage, Director Mrs. Catarina Alfredo (see plate 24,
[email protected]; +258 824041647).
Accompanied by Mrs. C. Alfredo, as the excellent guide, we visited or methodological surveyed in Guvuro
following areas:
▪ Cemetery partially destroyed by Save River. The Municipal Council of Nova Mambone is planed
transfer still preserved burials to new place;
▪ Church (15) with remarkable architecture outside (during visit church was closed);
▪ Old Mambone mosque with serious problem of fluvial erosion; and
▪ Mambone archaeological site almost totally destroyed by fluvial erosion. On the base of
decorated ceramics fragments site can be dated for late Early Iron Age (Tana Tradition) and Late
Iron Age attributed to Luangwa Tradition (11 – 16 c. AD).
Other place visited by our time was well known archaeological site recorded already during colonial
period. Very serious fluvial erosion and agriculture disturb this Late Iron Age site. The heavy rain not
allowed us to more detailed photographic documentation closing working day.
Plate 3: Mr. Raimundo Zefanias Tangue, District
Director of the Cultural Heritage in Inhassoro
Plate 4: Mrs. Catarina Alfredo, District Director of the
Cultural Heritage in Nova Mambone
Plate 5: Many site like this near Inhassoro, after methodological field survey was canceled from list of District Board
of Culture recorded as “archaeological sites” due lack of clear evidence
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
75
Plate 6: Fluvial erosion destroying archaeological site Mambone 2 and put in risk church, cemetery and mosque
14/01/2015: Maps, Photos and Short Description
This day field work, survey and records were concentrated to following localities, sites and points:
Name of surveyed locality or site
Site Description Easting UTM 36K
Northing UTM 36K
Elev.
Crossing Mangarelane
No archaeological evidence 726421 7602989 57 m
Machamba No archaeological evidence 725715 7606828 57 m
Gas Field No archaeological evidence 728829 7603312 57 m
Gas Field No archaeological evidence 730848 7603742 44 m
CH105
Methodist Church
Methodist Church with urged need to be renovated
731985 7602292 43 m
Gas Field No archaeological evidence 732330 7601110 35 m
Machamba Paulo No archaeological evidence 732330 7601110 35 m
Machamba Ignacio No archaeological evidence 725715 7606828 40 m
No name Village abandoned in 2001 712605 7593389 48 m
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
76
Name of surveyed locality or site
Site Description Easting UTM 36K
Northing UTM 36K
Elev.
AR104
2134Db1
Dispersed pottery Luangwa Tradition. Site disturbed by practice of agriculture and erosion
706262 7596848 72 m
Plate 7: Ruins of Maritime Delegate office constructed 1946
Plate 8: Machamba of Mr. Ignacio, typical in
Inhassoro District
15/01/2015: Maps, Photos and Short Description
This day field work, survey and records were concentrated to following localities, sites and points:
Name of surveyed locality or site
Site Description Easting UTM 36K
Northing UTM 36K
Elev.
SP103
Veloso
Sacred Place – circumcision. Where sickness are buried. Field survey and interview done by Ercidio Nhatule with recently circumcised young boy done by
732758 7601174 25 m
Road to Mabime No archaeological evidence 727797 7598523 54 m
To Temane No archaeological evidence 728798 7595498 57 m
Gas Field (33) No archaeological evidence 730302 7593242 50 m
Gas Field (35) No archaeological evidence 733962 7593805 34 m
Amendoim Field No archaeological evidence 730746 7589665 67 m
GasField5 No archaeological evidence 730748 7589668 63 m
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
77
Name of surveyed locality or site
Site Description Easting UTM 36K
Northing UTM 36K
Elev.
SP106
Chipongo
Paulo Vilankulos, artist, community leader, traditional doctor
731039 7588818 70 m
Chitsotso No archaeological evidence 718886 7586417 24 m
Maimalene Maimalene, No archaeological evidence 716578 7601356 31 m
SP104
Pecane SP
Sacred Place: Dialog with some women. Taking both in the Pecane Lake help pregnant women have healthy child.
737921 7567790 24 m
AR110
Lago Pecane
Grass. Late Iron Age Archaeological Site. Few Luangwa Tradition decorated pottery.
737374 7567975 23 m
Mangarelane I Interview with Regulo Paiva Jose 732030 7602076 44 m
AR112
Malongojiva Deciduous, Archaeological site LIA 723071 7600815 38 m
Mabime No archaeological evidence 724375 7598566 45 m
On the way to Mabime.
No archaeological evidence. Cemetery but no visible burial. White cotton sheet indicate area of cemetery
726334 7597963 46 m
CE103
Malongojiva
Considered as Sacred Place probably with some ancient burials (according to local people). Some recent potsherds.
722872 7601191 65 m
Plate 9: Women of Mangarelane 1 village recently settled in this area
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
78
Plate 11: Regulo/Community Leader in Mangarelane
Paito Jose during interview showing very extensive
knowledge about settlement in this region
Plate 13: Mr. Paito Jose and his family
Plate 12: Commercial center in Chipongo. Excellent
source of information about local history
Plate 14: Small lake created by Guvuro River during
the foods
16/01/2015: Maps, Photos and Short Description
This day field work, survey and records were concentrated to following localities, sites and points:
Name of surveyed locality or site
Obs. On locality-site Easting UTM 36K
Northing UTM 36K
Elev.
Amendoim field (57) No archaeological evidence 717326 7613576 18 m
MP101
Mr. Palulane Miloiro,
2nd Chief of AMETRAMO Curandeiro
His family came from Manusse where was installed many generations. Resettled in 2004. Installed since many generation. Interesting interview with Curandeiro nephew in Appendix 10.5) Curandeiro himself went to forest to look for natural medicine. Interview
716407 7613312 21 m
Temane No archaeological evidence 713950 7594242 33 m
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
79
Name of surveyed locality or site
Obs. On locality-site Easting UTM 36K
Northing UTM 36K
Elev.
MGTP MGTP Project. Site in proposed industrial infrastructure area. No archaeological evidence
713608 7593940 29 m
CPF CPF, Site in proposed industrial infrastructure area. No archaeological evidence
713337 7593347 32 m
BU101
Manusse
Burial, Sacred Place, claim by nephew of Pelulane Milioro António as Sacred Place and burial of his ancestor. Nothing is possible recorded at place
707969 7584144 46 m
CH103
Chipongo. Apostolic Church
Church Apostol's with rustic original architecture. Assembleia de Deus
716789 7580422 28 m
Machamba (76) No archaeological evidence 720380 7615050 44 m
Plate 14:The best information are from people coming from interior and selling their goods near EN1
Plate 15: The migrants from northern province manifest their song and dance after completed initiation
ritual in Chipongo, Inhambane Province. Local people were rather astonished but accepted telling that OL
investments bring many cultural innovations
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
80
17/01/2015: Maps, Photos and Short Description
This day field work, survey and records were concentrated to following localities, sites and points:
Name of surveyed locality or site
Site Description Easting UTM 36K
Northing UTM 36K
Elev.
Machamba (77) No archaeological evidence
It is raining 726256 7619582 61 m
Machamba (79) No archaeological evidence
It is raining 720136 7614951 44 m
Machamba (80) No archaeological evidence
It is raining 714704 7612120 34 m
Machamba (81) No archaeological evidence
It is raining 716576 7598744 32 m
Machamba (85) No archaeological evidence
It is raining 716502 7605579 32 m
Plate 16: Guvuro River - Along this river are most fertile soils in Inhambane Province
Plate 17: Guvuro River during floods cutting road to Mabime
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
81
18/01/2015. Maps, Photos and Short Description
This day field work, survey and records were concentrated to following localities, sites and points:
Name of surveyed locality or site
Site Description Easting UTM 36K
Northing UTM 36K
Elev.
Machamba (84) No archaeological evidence 716502 7605579 32 m
MP102
Curandeiro
N’anga/Curandeiro Xinhangane Manhike. AMETRAMO member. Along EN1
716612 7605310 30 m
AR114
Mapanzene Praia
Few archaeological evidence and shallow shell midden
736093 7595224 12 m
AR109
Seelemane
Few quartz microlith and Late Iron Age pottery. Site covered by high grass and partially disturbed by agriculture. Site code 2135Cb1
735064 7594151 50 m
AR110
Lago Pecane
Archeological Site disturbed by practice of agriculture, LIA4
737374 7567975 23 m
SP07
Chip1ongo
Sacred Place (5), probably burial of community leaders
731770 7588865 51 m
BU103
Chipongo
Sacred Place. Burial of the founder of Chipongo in the end of 19 c. AD. No archaeological evidence
733919 7589938 55 m
Vilankulos District Capital 739299 7565941 23 m
Plate 18: Some places indicated by local communities were inaccessible due high grass and swamp
Plate 19:..other due very dense vegetation. Both places are
paradise for snack and other, typical for this environment,
animals
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
82
19/01/2015: Maps, Photos and Short Description
This day field work, survey and records were concentrated to following localities, sites and points:
Name of surveyed locality or site
Site Description Easting UTM 36K
Northing UTM 36K
Elev.
AR105
Temane 2
Site the first time was recorded in 2000. Small area with high concentration of Luangwa Tradition Pottery and iron slag A.S. LIA5
716126 7598079 48 m
Govuro R No archaeological evidence 718829 7599381 39 m
Machamba (15) No archaeological evidence 711720 7590652 58 m
Machamba (55) No archaeological evidence 710219 7587168 37 m
SP105
St Ana Sacred Place (7). Old cemetery 716489 7601678 44 m
AR103
Near St. Ana A.S. LIA9Village 716719 7601505 67 m
Machamba (51) No archaeological evidence 715073 7610789 19 m
CH102
Jofane Church Evangelic Church (60) 714664 7612121 37 m
Machamba Vera No archaeological evidence 714817 7612084 42 m
Machamba (53) No archaeological evidence 716708 7613332 51 m
2135Ca1 Site disturbed by agriculture 717329 7613438 42 m
Machamba(56) No archaeological evidence 720136 7614951 34 m
8 km Inhassoro Sacred Place. Centro de Reavivamento Espiritual
720470 7615047 37 m
AR115
2135Ca1
Archaeological Site. Late Iron Age. Recorded in 2000, now totally disturbed by agriculture. Recorded
726481 7619521 76 m
BU104
Mangarelane Burial
Only two burial are visible. Grass very high. Lot of cobras which are considered protector of ancestors
726639 7618240 54 m
From PPPS1 to PPPS 4
Proposed Infrastructure/Power Plant Site
712662 to 712133
7592438 to 7591271
41 m
Machamba (11) grass 712530 7592360 51 m
Machamba (12) Grass 712300 7591839 50 m
Machamba (13) Grass 713107 7591806 46 m
Machamba (14) Grass 711965 7591106 50 m
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
83
Name of surveyed locality or site
Site Description Easting UTM 36K
Northing UTM 36K
Elev.
From TLR1 to TLR5 TLR1 - Transmission Line Route1. No archaeological evidence
712564 7592045 45 m
G11, G2 & G3 Gas/Water pipeline route over the Guvuro River. No archaeological evidence
712746,
712754 &
712875
7592447, 7593408 & 7593578
38 - 42 m
From W1 to W12 Gas/Water pipeline route over the Guvuro River. No archaeological evidence
713781
722159
7592446
7595864 41 m
Macovane Administrative Post 712561 7621799 60 m
Temane BC Temane Base Camp 716319 7598165 51 m
Mangugumete Village 717058 7596102 41 m
Nhapele Village 698446 7618863 47 m
Machamba (18)
30 minute walking Field Survey
698374 7617620 39 m
Machamba (19) 696626 7605168 37 m
Machamba (20) 707274 7605019 36 m
Temane Gas Field: No archaeological evidence 604134 7594881 51 m
Manusse Gas Field: No archaeological evidence 707125 7585185 48 m
Litlau No archaeological evidence 716489 7599301 45 m
Plate 20: The rain and local flood some time have limited out effort more detailed survey
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
84
Plate 21:Some aspects of road were even difficult for 4 x 4 and highly fuel consuming
20 & 21/01/2015: Maps, Photos and Short Description
This day field work, survey and records were concentrated to following localities, sites and points:
Name of surveyed locality or site
Site Description Easting UTM 36K
Northing UTM 36K
Elev.
AR113
Manyikeni
Madzimbabwe. Open Air Museum. Stone wall. Zimbabwe Tradition. Excavations 1975, 1976, 1978/79, Survey 2011
690279 7545424 98 m
AR107
Nhachengue
Archaeological Site already investigated by L. Adamowicz, Ch. Linqvist and P. Sinclair in 1981
723505 7471587 44 m
Magume No archaeological evidence 727463 7507596 71 m
Machanisse No archaeological evidence 718246 7496141 61 m
Machanisse No archaeological evidence 722381 7496042 56 m
Malimbane No archaeological evidence 727844 7499113 48 m
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
85
Name of surveyed locality or site
Site Description Easting UTM 36K
Northing UTM 36K
Elev.
Nhanimela No archaeological evidence 728093 7505100 49 m
AR108
Nhanimela1
Archaeological site. Stone walls. Zimbabwe Tradition
728291 7505342 70 m
AR106
Chibuene
2235Ab1, Investigated by L. Adamowicz 1981 and Sinclair, P, 1987
739894 7559910 12 m
Plate 22: Some village are abandonned and many of
young people went to RSA and adult move to Vilankulos
or Inhambane
Plate 23: Some road was difficult, narrow and
dangerous for exterior good looking car
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
86
Map Summarized Survey Tracks done in 2015
LEGEND
P - Walking survey:
Systematic field survey
Late Iron Age sites
Late Stone Age sites
Plate 24: Dense grass and the bushes substancialy limited surface survey
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
87
19/06/2018: The survey from Inhassoro to MGtP, Manusse and Pipe Brige
The survey confirme results of research done
15/01/2015. Due to the heavy rain in few past months
the area is currently covered with dense grass and
the bushes very limited surface studies especially the
area of the proposed powerline.
20/06/2018: he Survey from Inhassoro to Mangarelane, Mabime and Govuro River (Bridge)
This day survey was concentrated on new sites indicated by Mr. Santos Manuel
Aguim and his brother Marco were indicated as guide and assistents to
archaeologival survey in 19 and 20 of June 2018 by Natalia F. Chivambo, Director of District Board of Culture,
Youth and Technology (844233851, [email protected] , [email protected] )
Name of surveyed locality or site
Site Description Easting UTM 36K
Northing UTM 36K
Elev.
BU 110 Burial of Santos Aguium father;
Photo presented on cover page; and
For detailed description (see page 23, 30). 724898 7606809 58 m
BU 111 Two burial of unknown family, Mangarelane I;
and
For detailed description (see page 23, 30); 725667 7606208 52 m
BU 112 One burial of unknown person; and
For detailed description (see page 23). 727810 7598642 47 m
CE 106 6 - 7 graves of two families, Mangarelane II;
and
For detailed description (see page 24, 30). 725825 7606222 50 m
CE 107 8 graves of diferent or unknown families,
Mabime; and
For detailed description (see page 23). 719326 7599913 52 m
CH 107 Semi-permanent catholic church
Mangarelane II; and
For detailed description (see page 24). 725723 7606467 62 m
CH 108 Semi-permanent catholic church Mabime;
and
For detailed description (see page 24). 719533 7599785 68 m
Plate 25: Dense grass and the bushes substancialy limited surface survey
Map 1:Showing itinerary of 19/06/18
survey
Plate 26: New catholic church built recently.
Location: On the south limits of the project area
36 K 716879 7581441
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
88
Plate 27: Catholic church of St. José in Mangarelane II
(Adamowicz 2018)
Plate 30: Interior of St. José church (Adamowicz 2018)
Plate 28: BU 111, Two burial of unknown families
Plate 31: CE 106, 6 - 7 graves of two families. The
Guardian Mrs Lucilda
Plate 29: BU 112. One burial of unknown person
Plate 32: CE 107, 8 graves of diferent or unknown
families, Mabime
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
89
APPENDIX A.3: CULTURAL HERITAGE RECORD SHEETS
Archaeological sites
CULTURAL HERITAGE RECONNAISSANCE AND SURVEY
AR101
Prof. Dr. Leonardo Adamowicz & Ercídio J. J. Nhatule
Rua Comte João Belo 203, Maputo, C.P. 3610
[email protected]; 827737080; 21326287
HISTORY ARCHAEOLOGY X ETHNOGRAPHY OTHER
Project: SASOL MGTP PROJECT
Provinces Inhambane
District Mabote Guvuro Inhassoro Vilankulos
Site location:
SITE NAME: MAMBONE SAVE RIVER Site no
COORDINATES: UTM E 36K 714602 N 36K 7679717
PROVINCE: INHAMBANE District: Guvuro
OWNERSHIP PRIVATE State X City Unknown
NAME OF
OWNER DDPC (Distr. Board of C.H.) Recorder Leonardo Adamowicz
Site description AR01
The heritage site type
Archaeological X Ethnological Architectonic other
Natural sitting Open air Rock shelter Near river/lake/sea X
Estimation of ground
cover Estimate h 2
Degree of
disturbance Estimate % 80
Type of disturbance Cultivation X Natural X Industrial
Construction Lend leveled Excavation
FAO Soil type Luvic arenosols FAO Soil Code QL 15-1a
Accessibility
(description) Regular for this district, partially very difficult due route erosion
Artefacts (only few test sample collected)
Ceramic: X Nucleus 0 Metal 0 Imported goods 0
Decorated X Flakes 0 Iron scores X Bones 0
N/decorated X 0 Bronze 0 Beads X
Daga 0 Quartz/micr 0 Furnaces 0 Stone walls 0
Chronology Late Iron Age 11 – 16 c. AD
Cultural context Late Farming Luangwa Tradition Recent
Description general Sandy soil. Eroded site in risk of disappearance during next flood
Surface area
(sq m) 220 Max. length 100 Max. width 210 Elevation m 7
Artefacts
density
Heav
y medium: light: X Single artefacts:
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
90
Deposit depth
(m) 35 cm Number of cultural levels: 3 Unknown
Classification, mapping and assessment of significance of the cultural heritage
Viability of observation Good X Resonable Insufficient
Scientific value High X Medium Low
State of conservation Regular In Risk X Undetermined
Impact consequence assessment of eventually prosed activities by Project
Type of impact Not
notable X Direct Indirect
Nature of impact
Positive N/a
Negative N/a
Indifferent N/a
Activities which induce impact: Agriculture and erosion
Spatial Scale: On-site: Local: x National: International
Temporary Scale Short-
term
Long
term: Temporary: Permanent: X
Prediction - magnitude of Impact Very
High
High Reduced:
Medium Unknown
Mitigation measures
Description:
It is impossible take especial mitigation measure. Erosion along Save River is global. It is necessary organize large scale archaeological research including test pits and
excavation.
Maps/Photos/Graphics: Map 9. Showing location of Mambone 1 Late Iron Age Site
36 K 714602 7679717
A B C
A. Local recent pottery, 19 c. AD; B & C. Samples of Luangwa Tradition Pottery – costal faces.
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
91
PROJECT: SASOL MGTP PROJECT
SITE NAME MABONE 1, Save River SITE CODE AR102
UTM 36K 714602 7679717 WGS84 S S20 58 14.3 E E35 03 51.0
VILLAGE Mambone DISTRICT Guvuro PROVINCE Inhambane
SITE DESCRIPTION
Natural sitting: Open air X Rock shelter Along river/lake/sea
Surface area (m2) 130 Elevation (m) 14 FAO Soil Type Luvic arenosols
(QL15/1a)
Accessibility
(description) Along Save River, disturbed by fluvial erosions and repeating floods.
CULTURAL CONTEXT
Deposit depth (cm) UNKNOWN Number of cultural layers UNKNOWN
Settlement description Typical in this region settlement of fishmen and agriculture and
farming community
Cronostratigraphic
framework Late Farming Community. 1st half of 2nd mill. AD
Artefacts visible on site
surface
Pottery X Stone tools Iron scores Bones X
Daga Furneces Rock
Paintings Stone walls
IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION
Nature of impact Positive Negative Indifferent X Others
(describe below)
Mitigation measure Only vere urgent escavation in preserved part of site. Very
strong fluvial erosion.
Site significance HIGH State of conservation IN RISK
Archaeological Site Record Sheet
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
92
Plate 33: General view of preserved part of site
Plate 34: Drawings and photos of finds
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
93
PROJECT: SASOL MGTP PROJECT
SITE NAME CATH. MISSION St. Ana SITE CODE AR103
UTM 36K 716719 7601505 WGS84 S 21 40 35.7 E E35 05 40.2
VILLAGE Along EN1 DISTRICT Inhassoro PROVINCE Inhambane
SITE DESCRIPTION
Natural sitting: Open air X Rock shelter Along river/lake/sea
Surface area (m2) 300 Elevation (m) 67 FAO Soil Type Luvic arenosols
(QL15/1a)
Accessibility
(description) Easy, Regular
CULTURAL CONTEXT
Deposit depth (cm) UNKNOWN Number of cultural layers UNKNOWN
Settlement description Small settlement, at present 125 m to the noth from Mission
Cronostratigraphic
framework Late Farming Community, 1st half of 2nd millenium AD.
Artefacts visible on site
surface
Pottery X Stone tools Iron scores Bones
Daga Furneces Rock
Paintings Stone walls
IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION
Nature of impact Positive Negative Indifferent X Others
(describe below)
Mitigation measure Test pits escavation ti establish chrono-stratigraphic framework
Site significance HIGH State of conservation Regular
Archaeological Site Record Sheet
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
94
Plate 35: Late Iron Age potsherds. Some similarity do Zimbabwe Tradition ceramic and general east African costal motives. Photos of finds
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
95
PROJECT: SASOL MGTP PROJECT
SITE NAME 2134Db1 SITE CODE AR104
UTM 36K 706262 7596848 WGS84 S 21 43 11.6 E 34 59 38.7
VILLAGE Manusse DISTRICT Inhassoro PROVINCE Inhambane
SITE DESCRIPTION
Natural sitting: Open air X Rock shelter Along river/lake/sea
Surface area (m2) Elevation (m) 72 FAO Soil Type Luvic arenosols (QL15/1a)
Accessibility
(description)
Dispersed pottery Luangwa Tradition. Site disturbed by practice of agriculture and erosion. Sistematic field survey.
CULTURAL CONTEXT
Deposit depth (cm) UNKNOWN Number of cultural layers UNKNOWN
Settlement description Site parcially destroyed by road ad erosion and partially disturbed by
agriculture and forest extensive exploration.
Cronostratigraphic
framework Late Farming Community, 1st half of 2nd mil.l AD
Artefacts visible on site
surface
Pottery X Stone tools Iron scores Bones
Daga Furneces Rock
Paintings Stone walls
IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION
Nature of impact Positive Negative X Indifferent Others
(describe below)
Mitigation measure More reaserch and documentation is needed before site wanish totally
Site significance HIGH State of conservation IN RISK
Archaeological Site Record Sheet
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
96
Plate 36: Very atipical place for Late African settlement. Probably potsherd were recently transported from distant location together with soil (clay) to build this road
Plate 37: The Late Iron Age ceramic similar do Chibuene pottery
Plate 38: Some potsherd with characteristic typical to be washed or preserved in marine environment
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
97
PROJECT: SASOL MGTP PROJECT
SITE NAME TEMANE 2, A.S. SITE CODE AR105
UTM 36K 716126 7598079 WGS84 S 21 42 27.4 E 35 05 21.2
VILLAGE Old Temane DISTRICT Inhassoro PROVINCE Inhambane
SITE DESCRIPTION
Natural sitting: Open air X Rock shelter Along river/lake/sea
Surface area (m2) 280 Elevation (m) 48 ? ?
Accessibility
(description)
The first time was recorded in 2000. Small area with high concentration of Luangwa Tradition Pottery and iron slag
CULTURAL CONTEXT
Deposit depth (cm) UNKNOWN Number of cultural layers UNKNOWN
Settlement description Small but rich in artefacts settlement with pottsherd and daga, In 2000,
durante survey has been find iron slag and glass beads
Cronostratigraphic
framework Late Farming Community, settlement of 1st half of 2nd millenium AD.
Artefacts visible on site
surface
Pottery X Stone tools Iron scores Bones
Daga Furneces Rock
Paintings Stone walls
IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION
Nature of impact Positive Negative Indifferent X Others
(describe below)
Mitigation measure
Site não is almost invisible on surface. No more research is needed. Many similar site well preserved still exist in region.
Site significance HIGH State of conservation IN RISK
Archaeological Site Record Sheet
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
98
Plate 39: From EN1 take this direction but after look for coordinates
Plate 40: Potsherd collected in Old Temane in 2000 with motives of decoration characteristic for early face of Late Iron Age
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
99
PROJECT: SASOL MGTP PROJECT
SITE NAME CHIBUENE SITE CODE AR106 2235Ab1
UTM 36K 739894 7559910 WGS84 S 22 02 56.8 E 35 19 27.9
VILLAGE Vilankulos DISTRICT Vilankulos PROVINCE Inhambane
SITE DESCRIPTION
Natural sitting: Open air Rock shelter Along river/lake/sea X
Surface area (m2) 560 Elevation (m) 12 ? ?
Accessibility
(description) From Vilankulos, in direction to airoport and after INAP school
CULTURAL CONTEXT
Deposit depth (cm) 360 Number of cultural layers 5 (five)
Settlement description Recorded by Paul Sinclair 1979, Investigated by L. Adamowicz 1981 and
Sinclair, P., 1987 Survey 2015 to Collecting new records
Cronostratigraphic
framework
Early Iron and Late Farming Community, imports from Persia, awahili culture and China.
Artefacts visible on site
surface
Pottery X Stone tools Iron scores X Bones X
Daga X Furneces X Rock
Paintings Stone walls
IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION
Nature of impact Positive Negative Indifferent X Others
(describe below)
Mitigation measure Site is classified and protected by the inistry of Culture. Site in risk due maritime
erosion and human exploration of shell midden
Site significance V. HIGH State of conservation IN RISK
Archaeological Site Record Sheet
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
100
Plate 41: Chibuene Archaeological site/The most important site in Inhambane Province, Vilankulos District..
Information desk designed was by L. Adamowicz. For Ministry of Culture
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
101
Plate 42: More common pottery of Late Iron Age is represented in Chibuene Assemblege
Plate 43: The highest shell midden in Africa
Plate 44: Ercidio Nhatule and guardian of site Chibuene
Plate 45: Some aspect of Chibuene archaeological site
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
102
PROJECT: SASOL MGTP PROJECT
SITE NAME NHACHENGUE SITE CODE AR107
UTM 36K 723505 7471587 WGS84 S 22 50 55.0 E 35 10 41.3
VILLAGE Nhachengue DISTRICT Vilankulos PROVINCE Inhambane
SITE DESCRIPTION
Natural sitting: Open air X Rock shelter Along river/lake/sea
Surface area (m2) 480 Elevation (m) 44 FAO Soil Type Luvic arenosols (QL15/1a)
Accessibility
(description) Near EN1
CULTURAL CONTEXT
Deposit depth (cm) 65 Number of cultural layers 3
Settlement description Archaeological Site already investigated by L. Adamowicz, Ch. Linqvist and
P. Sinclair in 1981. Survey and Test Pits 1981, Field Survey 2015
Cronostratigraphic
framework Early Farming Communitty
Artefacts visible on site
surface
Pottery X Stone tools Iron scores Bones X
Daga Furneces Rock
Paintings Stone walls
IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION
Nature of impact Positive Negative Indifferent X Others
(describe below)
Mitigation measure Not planned any mitigation measure
Site significance HIGH State of conservation IN RISK
Archaeological Site Record Sheet
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
103
Map 10: Showing location and site extension
Plate 46: Early Iron Age pottery sample find in Nhachengue archaeological site
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
104
PROJECT: SASOL MGTP PROJECT
SITE NAME Nhanimela 1 SITE CODE AR108
2235Ca01
UTM 36K 728291 7619521 WGS84 S 22 32 35.8 E 35 13 11.4
VILLAGE Nhanimela DISTRICT Vilankulos PROVINCE Inhambane
SITE DESCRIPTION
Natural sitting: Open air X Rock shelter Along river/lake/sea
Surface area (m2) 320 Elevation (m) 70 FAO Soil Type Luvic arenosols
(QL15/1a)
Accessibility
(description)
18 km from Machanisse. Sandy and clay narrow road. Extremely difucult during the rain. Easy/well visible way from village to site on the hill.
CULTURAL CONTEXT
Deposit depth (cm) UNKNOWN Number of cultural layers UNKNOWN
Settlement description
Ruins of stone wall on the top of small hill. Previously covered by dense forest considered sacred by recently area was cleared by order of administrator from Vilankulos.
Cronostratigraphic
framework
Late Farming Community, madzimbabwe settlement of 1st half of 2nd millenium AD. Probably similar residential and cultural pattern as in Manyikeni.
Artefacts visible on site
surface
Pottery X Stone tools Iron scores Bones X
Daga Furneces Rock
Paintings Stone walls X
IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION
Nature of impact Positive Negative Indifferent X Others
(describe below)
Mitigation measure
Site recently descovered need to be invistigated as soon as possible due archaeological and historical importance and studies about state formation in Mozambique.
Site significance HIGH State of conservation IN RISK
Archaeological Site Record Sheet
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
105
Plate 47: Way to madzimbabwe
Plate 48: On top of the hill
Plate 49: The longest well preserved stone wall 70 - 110 cm high and 120 m long
Plate 50: 50 to 80 cm large
Plate 51: Very few potsherd on surface
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
106
Plate 52: Local guides/Osvaldo, Martina and Carlos
Plate 53: Similar tecnic as in Manyikeni or Great Zimbabwe
Plate 54: Guardian of the site. Family of local leader in absence in Maputo
Plate 55: Decorated fragment of large recipient
Plate 56: Landscape outside the stone walls
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
107
PROJECT: SASOL MGTP PROJECT
SITE NAME N. SELEMANE SITE CODE AR109 2135Cb1
UTM 36K 735064 7594151 WGS84 S 21 44 26.4 E 35 16 21.9
VILLAGE Seelemane DISTRICT Vilankulos PROVINCE Inhambane
SITE DESCRIPTION
Natural sitting: Open air X Rock shelter Along river/lake/sea
Surface area (m2) 300? Elevation (m) 47 FAO Soil Type ?
Accessibility
(description)
CULTURAL CONTEXT
Deposit depth (cm) Unknown Number of cultural layers Uknown
Settlement description Few quartz microlith (?) and pottery. Site covered by high grass and partially disturbed by agriculture
Cronostratigraphic
framework
Possible presence of Late Stone Age hunters/gatherer camp. More research should be done. Presence of the Late Iron Age confirmed.
Artefacts visible on site
surface
Pottery X Stone tools Iron scores Bones
Daga Furneces Rock
Paintings Stone walls
IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION
Nature of impact Positive Negative Indifferent X Others
(describe below)
Mitigation measure More reserch should be done in this area.
Site significance LOW State of conservation Regular
Archaeological Site Record Sheet
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
108
Plate 57: Indication direction to Selemane village but it is not direction to archaeologica site laying more to the interior
Plate 58: More research should be done on this site with characteristic of Late Stone Age and some aspect of Middle Stone Age
Plate 59: Late Iron Age potsherd recorded on surface
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
109
PROJECT: SASOL MGTP PROJECT
SITE NAME LAGO PECANA SITE CODE AR110
UTM 36K 737374 7567975 WGS84 S 21 58 35.9 E 35 17 55.9
VILLAGE DISTRICT Vilankulos PROVINCE Inhambane
SITE DESCRIPTION
Natural sitting: Open air X Rock shelter Along river/lake/sea
Surface area (m2) 100 Elevation (m) 23 FAO Soil Type No data
Accessibility
(description) Regular
CULTURAL CONTEXT
Deposit depth (cm) UNKNOWN Number of cultural layers UNKNOWN
Settlement description
The site comprises an extensive scatter (c 160 x 450 m) of cultural remains close to lake Pecane and few kms from the sea. The surrounding of the site
are characteristic of the southern Mozambique coast.
Cronostratigraphic
framework Late Farming Community 1st half of 2nd millenium AD.
Artefacts visible on site
surface
Pottery X Stone tools Iron scores Bones
Daga Furneces Rock
Paintings Stone walls
IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION
Nature of impact Positive Negative Indifferent X Others
(describe below)
Mitigation measure More reserch should be done in this area.
Site significance HIGH State of conservation Regular
Archaeological Site Record Sheet
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
110
Plate 60: Potsherds and daga fragments on surface along eroded cost of lack
Plate 61: Lake is almost dry
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
111
PROJECT: SASOL MGTP PROJECT
SITE NAME 2135Cc1 SITE CODE AR111
UTM 36K 708393 7583902 WGS84 S 21 50 08.9 E 35 00 58.6
VILLAGE DISTRICT Vilankulos PROVINCE Inhambane
SITE DESCRIPTION
Natural sitting: Open air X Rock
shelter Along river/lake/sea
Surface area (m2) 250 Elevation (m) 43 FAO Soil Type Luvic arenosols (QL15/1a)
Accessibility
(description)
CULTURAL CONTEXT
Deposit depth (cm) UNKNOWN Number of cultural layers 2?
Settlement description Very small settlement with reasonable visibility of the
potsherd on surface
Cronostratigraphic
framework Late Farming Community, of 1st half of 2nd millenium AD.
Artefacts visible on site
surface
Pottery X Stone tools Iron scores Bones
Daga Furneces Rock
Paintings Stone walls
IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION
Nature of impact Positive Negative Indifferent X Others
(describe below)
Mitigation measure Actually no reason for mitigation measure
Site significance HIGH State of conservation Regular
Archaeological Site Record Sheet
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
112
Plate 62: The Late Iron Age potsherd and spindlehole are unique artefacts registered on surface of this site
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
113
PROJECT: SASOL MGTP PROJECT
SITE NAME MALANGOJIVA SITE CODE AR112
UTM 36K 723071 7600815 WGS84 S 21 40 55.4 E 35 09 21.4
VILLAGE Malangojiva DISTRICT Vilankulos PROVINCE Inhambane
SITE DESCRIPTION
Natural sitting: Open air X Rock shelter Along river/lake/sea
Surface area (m2) 200? Elevation (m) 38 FAO Soil Type Rhodic Ferrasols Fr4 5
Accessibility
(description) Easy. Regular by very nerrow road
CULTURAL CONTEXT
Deposit depth (cm) UNKNOWN Number of cultural layers UNKNOWN
Settlement description
Very large settlement with good visibility. The soils comprise coastal dune sands interspersed with claye alluvium. Climatic factors strongly influence crop viability and the are is more suitable for maize than sorghum or for pastoral practice.
Cronostratigraphic
framework
Probably Late Iron Age but more reaserch should be done. 2 decorated potsherd can be atributed to Early Iron Age
Artefacts visible on site
surface
Pottery X Stone tools Iron scores Bones
Daga Furneces Rock
Paintings Stone walls
IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION
Nature of impact Positive Negative Indifferent X Others
(describe below)
Mitigation measure Actually no reason for mitigation measure
Site significance HIGH State of conservation Regular
Archaeological Site Record Sheet
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
114
Plate 63: Accordingly to local informer the site was very intensively explored as cropfield for mandioca but now subject of anathema and became desert (?)
Plate 64: It’s looks that cultural layer is very thin or destroyed but potsherd are scattered on very vast area
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
115
PROJECT: SASOL MGTP PROJECT
SITE NAME MANYIKENI SITE CODE AR113
UTM 36K 690279 7545424 WGS84 S 22 11 09.7 E 34 50 44.2
VILLAGE Manyikeni DISTRICT Vilankulos PROVINCE Inhambane
SITE DESCRIPTION
Natural sitting: Open air X Rock shelter Along river/lake/sea
Surface area (m2) 1250 Elevation (m) 98 FAO Soil Type Luvic arenosols (QL15/1a)
Accessibility
(description) Very good road Mapinhane - Maboto.
CULTURAL CONTEXT
Deposit depth (cm) UNKNOWN Number of cultural layers UNKNOWN
Settlement description
Ruins of stone wall on the top of small hill. Madzimbabwe. Open Air Museum. Stone wall. Zimbabwe Tradition. Excavations 1975, 1976, 1978/79,
Survey 2011. Collecting new data.
Cronostratigraphic
framework
Late Farming Community, madzimbabwe settlement of 1st half of 2nd millenium AD.
Artefacts visible on site
surface
Pottery X Stone tools Iron scores X Bones X
Daga X Furneces X Rock
Paintings Stone walls X
IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION
Nature of impact Positive Negative Indifferent X Others
(describe below)
Mitigation measure
Site need to be under permanent control and invistigation due archaeological and historical importance and studies about state formation in Mozambique. Extensive The forest exploration is the main problem with
correct preservation of this site.
Site significance HIGH State of conservation IN RISK
Archaeological Site Record Sheet
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
116
Plate 65: Manyikeni “madzimbabwe” settlement 11/17 c. AD
Map 10: Showing Manyikeni stone walls, hats around the main site and intensity of occupation (Sinclair)
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
117
Plate 66: Entrance to stone walled settlement Plate 67: Part of disturbed settlement
Plate 68: Unfortunately mosto f desturbance is done by local people using stones from walls to mark a way for prominent visitors
Plate 69: Informative desk for tourists and visitors. Board project: Leonardo Adamowicz. Realization of the Ministry of culture
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
118
PROJECT: SASOL MGTP PROJECT
SITE NAME MAPANZENE PRAIA SITE CODE AR114
UTM 36K 73609
3 7595224 WGS84 S 21 43 56.2 E
35 16 33.5
VILLAG
E Mapanzene DISTRICT Vilankulos
PROVINC
E Inhambane
SITE DESCRIPTION
Natural
sitting: Open air X Rock shelter Along river/lake/sea
Surface area
(m2) 1300 Elevation (m) 12 FAO soil type
Rhodic Ferrasols Fr4 5 Fr
Accessibility
(description) Regular but only with 4 x 4 vehicule
CULTURAL CONTEXT
Deposit depth (cm) UNKNOW
N Number of cultural layers
UNKNOWN
Settlement
description Few archaeological evidence and shallow shell midden
Cronostratigraphic
framework Late Iron Age
Artefacts visible on
site surface
Pottery X Stone tools Iron scores Bones
Daga Furneces Rock Paintings Stone
walls
IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION
Nature of impact Positive Negative Indifferent X
Others
(describe
below)
Mitigation measure No mitication measure are planned
Site significance LOW State of conservation Regular
Archaeological Site Record Sheet
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
119
Plate 70: Entrance to Mapanzene Praia site
Plate 71: Mapanzene Praia site. Shell Midden
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
120
PROJECT: SASOL MGTP PROJECT
SITE NAME 2135Ca1 SITE CODE AR115
UTM 36K 726481 7619521 WGS84 S 21 30 45.8 E 35 11 10.9
VILLAGE DISTRICT Vilankulos PROVINCE Inhambane
SITE DESCRIPTION
Natural sitting: Open air X Rock shelter Along river/lake/sea
Surface area (m2) 250 Elevation (m) 76 FAO Soil Type Luvic arenosols (QL15/1a)
Accessibility
(description) Regular
CULTURAL CONTEXT
Deposit depth (cm) UNKNOWN Number of cultural layers UNKNOWN
Settlement description Small settlements with few potsherds. Badly disturbed by
agriculture and erosion.
Cronostratigraphic
framework Late Iron Age. 12 – 16 c. AD
Artefacts visible on site
surface
Pottery X Stone tools Iron scores Bones X
Daga Furneces Rock
Paintings Stone walls
IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND MITIGATION
Nature of impact Positive Negative Indifferent X Others
(describe below)
Mitigation measure No mitigations need at this time
Site significance LOW State of conservation Regular
Archaeological Site Record Sheet
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
121
Plate 72: Eroded archaeological site. Drawing of potsherd exceptionally collected from the surface showing rim, vessel form and decoration of ceramic invisible on photography
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
122
Burials of Community Leaders
BU 101. MANUSSE 36K 708107/7583993 Indicated by: Tomas Eusébio
Burial, Sacred Place, claim by nephew of Pululane Milioro António, Tomas Eusébio, resident 47 km away to the north – east as Sacred Place and burial of his ancestor. No more information was possible recorded at place. Many families from here were resettled and few new seems to not permanent residence license. Many plants recorded in place were recognized by AMETRAMO as potential (?) medicine plants.
Plate 73: Supposed burial of the ancestors of the curandeiro Pulalane
Plate 74: Local people believes that plants which are growing near burial can be use against sickness or bad spirits
BU102. MABIME 36K 708107/7583993 Indicated by local community
No visible burial. White cotton sheet indicate area of cemetery. Very short interview with local guardian and local people is available.
Plate 75: Burial near Mabime with very difficult access
BU103. CHIPANGO BURIAL 36K 733919/7589938 Indicated by: Paulo Vilankulos
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
123
Burial of the founder of Chipongo in the end of 19 c. AD. No archaeological evidence. It was impossible invite somebody to interview.
Plate 76: Chipango Burial was recently reconstructed and protected against erosion. Shark muzzle substitute
former elephant skull
BU104. MANGARELANE BURIAL
36K 726639/7618240 Indicated by: Mr Paiva Jose
Only two burial near baobabs are visible. Grass is very high. Lots of cobras which are considered protector of ancestors. Short interview with local women. During dry season is possible visit burial very close and see typical for this area “cobra constipeira” and yellow jiboa.
Plate 78: Burial is located between two baobabs but is trongly suggested to not visit burial or take picture
Plate 79:1 Local jiboia. No comments
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
124
Cemeteries
CE101. OLD MAMBONE 36K 710066/7677891 Indicated by Catarina Alfredo
Plate 80: Partially destroyed by river Save
CE102. NHAMANHECEA 36K 731614/7589086 Find by team
Church ISIONE (syncretic) and cemetery where have been buried people from Nhamanhcea two generation ago. Interview with some people/Survey.
Plate 81: Many cemeteries are associated with local churches or mosque
CE103. MALONGOJIVA 36K 722872/7602191 Indicated by local people but they new in place
Sacred Place probably with burials. The interview with guardian and local who advise us not take a picture because we take with us spirits of ancestors. As usually some recent potsherd find.
Sacred Places
SP101. Lago Sangene 36K 694159 7636550 Indicated by Raimundo Tangue
Field Survey: In this place during colonial time were organized ceremonies of initiation for boys. No pregnant women are allowed to wash something. Today place rather abandoned due resettlement in this area and lack of water in most period of year.
Plate 82: General view of Sangene Lake. During raining season lake is water lodges but this year still is almost dry
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
125
SP102. 8 km Inhassoro 36K 720470 7615047 Indicated by Raimundo Tangue
Sacred Place and Centro de Reavivamento Espiritual founded by Mr. A. Zunguza, bishop of syncretic church. Interview with Raimundo Tangue, indicate that this Spiritual Centre was closed by local administration but without presenting reason for this decision. Today place looks as rather abandoned. Appointment with member of church failed twice.
SP103. VELOSO 36K 732758 7601394 Recorded by team
Sacred Place - place for circumcision. Where sickness are buried. Field Survey and interview with local young men recently circumcised done by Ercidio Nhatule in Xitswa.
Plate 85: Place for circumcision rituals, as rule, as selected near baobabs or rock shelters.
SP104. PECANE 36K 737921 7567790 Recorded by team
Sacred Place near Vilankulos. Very eroded costs. Unfortunatly we came there very late but after conversation with some women we understood the importance of the water of this lake: taking bath in the Pecane Lake help pregnant women have healthy child however near the lake are enourmous quantity of different spieces of poisen snakes.
Plate 83: Only this information suggest existence of sacred place
Plate 84: Sickness buried in ceramic vessel
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
126
Plate 86: Sacred Lake is already cut by road and is drying very fast
SP105. Santa Ana 36K 716489/7601678 Indicated by local priest Jose
Considered by local people as Sacred Place but not specialy suported by church. Perhaps it was old cemetery? On surface recent potsherd were recorded
Plate 87: Some local people also claim that place was used for circumcision rituals before to be forbidden by catholic mission
SP106. CHIPANGO 1 36K 733919 7589938 Paulo Vilankulos
Paulo Vilankulos, artist, community leader, traditional doctor. Short interview is available.
Plate 88: Entrance to Paulo Vilankulos Sacred Place
Plate 89: Paulo Vilankulos, his mother and son in interior of sanctuary
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
127
S1P07. CHIPANGO 2 36K 731770/7588865 Indicated by local people
Sacred Place, probably burial of community leaders near very old baobab
Plate 89: One of the oldest baobab in area
Plate 90: Each part of baobab has its significant but more research should be done. Now stories are still confuse
Religious Monuments and Features, Churches and Mosque
M1O1. MOSQUE IN MAMBONE 36 K 710909/7677940 Build up in 1952. Recently renewed after flood
Local Muslim community is rather small but slowly growing. New mosque will be buld in near future as this one is in risk flood and small.
Plate 91: General view of mosque
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
128
Plate 92: Women waiting to clean mosque
Plate 93: Interior of mosque
CH101. MAMBONE 36 K 710518 76778833 On the list of local monument (Cristina Alfredo)
Remarkable architecture. Need to be renovated. Interview with Cristina Alfredo. Guardian with local nearby cemetery. 5/9/1938, Town from December, 22, 1938.
Plate 94: Cotholic church in Mambone
CH102. JOFANE 36 K. 714664 7612121 Invited to visit by local people
Evangelic Church Guardian with local nearby cemetery. Const. 1980. Ren. 1992 and 2001
Plate 95: According to pastor Geffrey “ Church is in permanent expansion and renovation… “
CH103. CHIPONGO 36 K 731389/7589159 Regular survey record
Apostolic Church, Assembleia de Deus. Guardian with local nearby cemetery. Pastor Michael
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
129
Plate 96: Pastor Michael collect material to build new church. This will be rather abandoned
CH104. Adventist 7 Day Church 36 K 716789 7580422
Adventist 7 Day Church with rustic original architecture. Pastor Rafael Taimo. Place reserved since 1988 but building stil in construction. Probably another new church will be build up in next year.
Plate 97: Adventist 7th Day Church in construction
CH105. EMUM 36 K 731957/7602292 Methodist Church with urged need to be renovate according to interview with priest. Guardian with local nearby cemetery
Plate 98: Methodist United church actually is closed and wait for renovation
CH106. MC St. Ana 36 K 716638/701677 Church St. Ana and professional school for boys and girls. Field Survey, Interview
According to short the Mission was built between 1937 and 41 but became fully functioning in 1960’s. The professional secondary school was built in late 1950’s, stop working shortly Independence and restart fully functioning with c 350 student after 1990.
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
130
Plate 99: St. Ana. Church of catholic mission near EN1
N’anga, Traditional Doctors - Curandeiros
(Note: Description of medicine plant used by local traditional medics, in Mozambique called “Curandeiros” is
described in Appendix .)
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
131
MP101. Mr. Palulane, 2nd Chief of AMETRAMO Curandeiro
His family came from Manusse where was installed many generations. Resettled in 2004. Installed since many generation
Coordinates: 36K 716407 7613312 - Owner of large field with medicine plant
Description Interesting interview with Curandeiro nephew in Appendix 10.5) Curandeiro after short meeting with us went to forest to look for natural medicine.
Plate 101: The youngest pacient
Plate 104: Palulane Pharmacie on the market in Mapinhane
Plate 100: Information desk
Plate 102: Palulane Pharmacie in the clinic
Plate 103: New wife from Northern Mozambique
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
132
MP102. Xinhangane Manhike Curandeiro. AMETRAMO member Recently Installed
Coordinates 36 K716612 7605310
Description: Traditional Doctor Recently open practice. None of medicine is based on plants, almost all are shells or clays. Close friend of Mateus Moises Massingue not present during our visit.
Plate 105: Pharmacie of Manhike
Plate 107: Mateus Massingue is new in area but not recognized by AMETRAMO
Plate 110: Massingue has larges pharmacies on the markets in many localities in Inhambane Province
Plate 108: Information desk to Manhike clinic
Plate106: Before we leave clinic Manhike has offered as local fruits with vit. C
Plate 109: Entrance to clinic
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
133
MP103. Zacarias Afonso Mabasso
AMETRAMO member
With tradition of 3 generation in the same place. Since 1925
Coordinates: 36 K 716427 7600269 *camp with plants
Description: Traditional doctor Zacarias Afonso Mabasso wos born in Malawi. Interview about medicine plants presented in App. 9.5.
Plate 111: Information on the road EN1
Plate 112: Mr. Zacarias Afonso Mabasso in front of his
clinic with Ercidio J.J. Nhatule and grandson Adao
Plate 113: Interior of Mr. Zacarias Mabasso clinic
Plate 114: Place and call and contact with ancestral spirits
Plate 115: One of possible prize for Mr. Z. Mabasso service - small antilop
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
134
Appendix A.4: Catalogue of Cultural Heritage Recorded Sites
Sites Recorded During Field Survey – January 2015 and suplemented by sites recorded 19 and 20 June, 2018
Guvuro, Inhassoro and Vilankulos Districts
MAP CODE Locality or Site Name Site Description Site Type Sub Type Name of Guardian
Easting UTM 36K
Northing UTM 36K
Elev. Date Site Sign.
AR101 Mambone 2 Archaeological Site, disturbed by river Save erosion. Field Survey
Archaeo-logical Pottery DBCH Guvuro 711329 7678063 10 m EIA 2-8 AD, LIA 11-16 AD
HIGH
AR102 Mambone 1. Save River Archaeological almost totally disturbed by fluvial erosion. Interview with Cristina Alfredo
Archaeo-logical Pottery DBCH Guvuro 714602 7679717 7 m LIA, 1st half of 2nd millennium AD
LOW
AR103 Near Catholic Mission St. Ana
Village. A.S. LIA9 Archaeo-logical Pottery PBCH in Inhambane.
716719 7601505 67 m 2nd half of 1st mill. and beginning of 2nd mill AD
MEDIUM
AR104 2134Db1 Dispersed pottery Luangwa Tradition. Site disturbed by practice of agriculture and erosion. Systematic field survey.
Archaeo-logical Pottery PBCH in Inhambane
706262 7596848 72 m LIA, 11-17 AD LOW
AR105 Temane 2 The first time was recorded in 2000. Small area with high concentration of Luangwa Tradition Pottery and iron slag
Archaeo-logical Pottery and Slag
PBCH in Inhambane
716126 7598079 48 m LIA, 1st half of 2nd millennium
MEDIUM
AR106 Chibuene 2235Ab1, Investigated by L. Adamowicz 1981 and Sinclair, P., 1987 Survey 2015 to Collecting new records
Archaeo-logical Pottery gold, porcelane
PBCH in Inhambane.
739894 7559910 12 m EIA. 2 - 8 AD, LIA, 11-17 AD
HIGH
AR107 Nhachengue
Archaeological Site already investigated by L. Adamowicz, Ch. Linqvist and P. Sinclair in 1981. Survey and Test Pits 1981, Field Survey 2015
Archaeo-logical Pottery PBCH in Inhambane.
723505 7471587 44 m EIA. 2 - 8 AD. Matola Tradition. With 28 very old baobabs
HIGH
AR108 Nhanimela1 Archaeological site. Stone walls. Zimbabwe Tradition. Field Survey
Archaeo-logical Monument PBCH in Inhambane.
728291 7505342 70 m LIA, 12-17 AD HIGH
AR109 2135Cb1 Near Seelemane Few quartz microlith and Late Iron Age pottery. Site covered by high grass and partially disturbed by agriculture
Archaeo-logical Pottery PBCH in Inhambane
735064 7594151 45 m More research needed. LSA? Pottery of Luangwa Tradition
LOW
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
135
Sites Recorded During Field Survey – January 2015 and suplemented by sites recorded 19 and 20 June, 2018
AR110 Lago Pecane Late Iron Age Archaeological Site. Few Luangwa Tradition decorated pottery. Disturbed by agriculture.
Archaeo-logical Pottery PBCH in Inhambane.
737374 7567975 23 m LIA, 1st half of 1st mill AD
LOW
AR111 2135Cc1 Village Archaeo-logical Pottery PBCH in Inhambane.
708393 7583982 43 m EIA & LIA, 2nd half of 1st mill. and beginning of 2nd mill. AD
MEDIUM
AR112 Malangojiva Archaeological site LIA Archaeo-logical Pottery PBCH in Inhambane.
723071 7600815 38 m LIA, 1st half of 1st millen. AD
LOW
AR113 Manyikeni
Madzimbabwe. Open Air Museum. Stone wall. Zimbabwe Tradition. Excavations 1975, 1976, 1978/79, Survey 2011. Collecting new data.
Archae-ological Monument PBCH in Inhambane.
690279 7545424 98 m LIA, XII - XVII c. HIGH
AR114 Mapanzene Praia Few archaeological evidence and shallow shell midden
Archaeo-logical Shell Midden n/a 736093 7595224 12 m some recent ceramic LOW
AR115 2135Ca1 Archaeological Site. Late Iron Age. Recorded in 2000, now totally disturbed by agriculture. Field survey
Archaeo-logical Pottery PBCH in Inhambane.
726481 7619521 76 m LIA, 1st half of 2nd mill. AD
LOW
BU101 Manusse
Burial, Sacred Place, claim by nephew of Milioro António as Sacred Place and burial of his ancestor. Nothing was possible recorded at place
Religious Burial Miloiro Antonio 708107 7583993 46 m Since 1925 but nephew was uncertain to the exact location
HIGH
BU102 On the way to Mabime No visible burial. White cotton sheet indicate area of cemetery. Interview Guardian and local people. Survey
Religious Burial Martinho André 726334 7597963 46 m Recent HIGH
BU103 Chipongo Burial of the founder of Chipongo in the end of 19 c. AD.
Religious Burial no data 733919 7589938 55 m 2 nd half of 19 c. AD HIGH
BU104 Mangarelane Only two burials are visible. Grass very high. Lot of cobras which are considered protector of ancestors. Interview with local women
Religious Burial no data, cobras protect the place.
732758 7601174 54 m functioning two generations
HIGH
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
136
Sites Recorded During Field Survey – January 2015 and suplemented by sites recorded 19 and 20 June, 2018
BU-105 Manusse Powerline
One grave, 15m east of powerline servitude. Identified by Sasol clearance team.
Religious espiritual
Burial unknown 710531 7587464 61 m unknown HIGH
BU-106 Manusse / powerline One grave, 30m west of powerline servitude. Identified by Sasol clearance team.
Religious espiritual
Burial unknown 710154 7586503 58 m unknown HIGH
BU-107 EN1 Two graves, 15 m east of powerline servitude. Identified by Sasol clearance team.
Religious espiritual
Burial unknown 714021 7577136 65 m uknown HIGH
BU-108 Powerline Two graves. Identified by Sasol clearance team.
Religious Burial local 714017 7577019 48 m unknown HIGH
BU-109 Powerline One grave, 3m east of powerline servitude. Identified by Sasol clearance team.
Religous Burial local 716911 7571374 52 m uknown HIGH
BU-110 Mangarelane II The grave of Santos´ Mabime family (father). Identified by archaeological team during survey 19/06/18
Religious Burial local 724897 7606809 54 m unknown HIGH
BU-111 Mangarelane II Two graves. Unknown family. Identified by archaeological team during survey 19/06/18
Religious Burial local 725666 7606208 55 m unknown HIGH
BU112 Mabime One grave. Unknown family. Identified by archaeological team during survey 19/06/18
Religious spiritual
Burial Local community 727810 7598642 42 m Recent HIGH
CE101 Old Mambone Partially destroyed by river Save. Interview with guardian and local
Religious Cemetery Local Church 710066 7677891 13 m Recent HIGH
CE102 Nhamanhcea Cemetery (17), where where buried people from Nhamanhcea two generation ago. Interview with some people/Survey
Religious Cemetery Pastor Michael 731614 7589086 75 m Recent HIGH
CE103 Malongojiva Sacred Place (2) Cultural Sacred Place Cemetery
Indicated by M. André
722872 7601191 65 m Probably abandoned cemetery 19 c. AD
HIGH
CE-106 Mangarelane II Five graves. Identified by archaeological team during survey 19/06/18
Cultural Religious Cemetery Indicated by Santos 725825 7606222 60 m Recent HIGH
CE-107 Mabime Seven graves. Identified by archaeological team during survey 19/06/18
Cultural Religious Cemetery Indicated by Santos 719326 7599913 54 m Recent HIGH
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
137
Sites Recorded During Field Survey – January 2015 and suplemented by sites recorded 19 and 20 June, 2018
CH101 Mambone Remarkable architecture. Need to be renovated. Interview with Cristina Alfredo. Guardian with local nearby cemetery
Cultural Religious Church (CH), Local Church 710518 76778833 6 m 5/9/1938, Town from December, 22, 1938
HIGH
CH102 Jofane Church 60 Evangelic Church (60) Guardian with local nearby cemetery
Religious Church (CH) no data 714664 7612121 37 m Const 1945. Ren. 1982 and 2001
MEDIUM
CH103 Chipongo Apostolic Church, Assembleia de Deus. Guardian with local nearby cemetery
Religious Church (CH) Pastor Michael 731389 7589159 35 m Recent HIGH
CH104 Apostolic Church Church Apostol's with rustic original architecture.
Religious Church (CH) Pastor Rafael Taimo
716789 7580422 28 m Since 1988. HIGH
CH105 Methodist Church Methodist Church with urged need to be renovate. Interview with priest. Guardian with local nearby cemetery
Religious Church (CH) not revealed 731957 7602292 43 m Recent. Since 1960? LOW
CH106 M.C.St. Ana Church St. Ana and professional school for boys and girls. Field Survey, Interview
Religious Church (CH) Monument
Padre José Sa Carneiro
716638 7601677 27 m Since 1937 - 41 HIGH
CH107 Mangarelane II
Catholic church of St. José (semi-permanent) with build with rudumental material. Identified by archaeological team during survey 19/06/18
Cultural Religious Church Indicated by Santos 725723 7606467 58 m Since 2017 LOW
CH108 Mabime Catholic church (semi-permanent) with build with rudumental material. Identified by archaeological team during survey 19/06/18
Cultural Religious Church Indicated by Santos 719509 7599787 52 m Recent LOW
MO101 Old Mambone / Guvuro Mosque. General information and visit. Guardian with local nearby cemetery
Religious Mosque (MO), Monument
Local 710909 7677940 4 m constr. 1952, recently reconstructed
HIGH
MP101 Curandeiro Palulane Miloiro Eusebio
Interesting interview with Curandeiro nephew. Curandeiro himself went to forest to look for natural medicine. Interview
Cultural Medicinal Plants (MP)
Palulane Miloiro Eusebio
716407 7613312 21 m Installed since 2004 HIGH
MP102 Curandeiro Xinhangane Manhiki METRAMO member
Traditional Doctor Recently open practice. None of medcin is based on plants, almost all are shells or clays
Cultural Medicinal Feature (MP)
Xinhangane Manhiki Rafo?
716612 7605310 43 Recently Installed MEDIUM
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
138
Sites Recorded During Field Survey – January 2015 and suplemented by sites recorded 19 and 20 June, 2018
MP103 Zacarias Afonso Mabasso Curandeiro. AMETRAMO member
Traditional Doctor Zacarias Afonso Mabasso was born in Malawi but family is from Inhambane province. Interview
Cultural Medicinal Plants (MP)
Zacarias Afonso Mabasso
716427 7600269 27 m With tradition of 3 generation in the same place. Since 1925.
HIGH
SP101 Lago Sangene Sacred Place. Field Survey Cultural Sacred Lake (SL)
n/a 694159 7635550 59 m Recent / Modern HIGH
SP102 8 km Inhassoro Sacred Place. Centro de Reavivamento Espiritual. Field survey. Interview
Cultural Sacred Place (SP)
no data 720470 7615047 37 m Not functioning LOW
SP103 Veloso
Sacred Place - circumcision. Where sickness are buried. Field Survey and interview with local young men recently circumcised done by Ercidio Nhatule in Xitswa
Cultural Sacred Place (SP)
not revealed 732758 7601394 25 m recent HIGH
SP104 Pecane SP Sacred Place. Dialog with some women. Taking both in the Pecane Lake help pregnant women have healthy child.
Cultural Sacred Lake (SL)
n/a 737921 7567790 24 m since three generations?
LOW
SP105 St Ana Sacred Place (7). Old cemetery Cultural and Religious
Sacred Place Cemetery
n/a 716489 7601678 44 m 1960´s HIGH
SP106 Chipongo Paulo Vilankulos, artist, community leader, traditional doctor. Interview
Cultural Sacred Place Paulo Vilankulos 733919 7589938 70 m Three generation. Probably since 1950?
HIGH
SP107 Chipongo S.P. Sacred Place (5), probably burial of community leaders
Cultural and Religious
Sacred Place (SP)
n/a 731770 7588865 51 m no data HIGH
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
139
APPENDIX A.5: MEDICINE PLANT RECORDED DURING SURVEY 2015
In Mozambique, the medicinal plants constitute a valuable instrument of traditional medicine, being widely
used in rural areas as the main source of medicines for primary health care. The socio-cultural value is
inexhaustible and the commercial potential is vastly unknown. Among the rich national heritage, the African
potato (Hypoxis spp.) and chibaha [Warburgia salutaris (g. Bertol.) ] are widely used in Inhambane Province
as in whole southern Africa. In the first case (African potato, black batata called in Inhassoro), the cormo has
been used in the treatment of various diseases, especially cancer and opportunistic diseases associated with
HIV/AIDS. In the second case (chibaha), the shells are used in the treatment of colds, flu and related diseases
as malaria, headaches, hemorrhoids and angina pectoris.
As such, the pursuit of these plants has been unreasonable and uncontrolled. At present, there are serious
indications of danger of extinction of these species and the establishment of priority conservation programs to
recover and preserve the (still) remnant of this valuable heritage. In this context, this research team began
very basic and preliminary record of medicinal plants in Inhambane Province. This can be considered as the
first phase began the study of plant used by Traditional Doctors members of METRAMO. This study, now and
in the future, is based on five components:
a. Interview with METRAMO and local Curandeiros;
b. Prospecting and geographic mapping; 3. Development taxonomic and genetic diversity studies in
partnership with botanist; 3;
c. Developing methods of vegetative propagation; and
d. Socio-economic impact assessment.
In this way it is hoped to assess the current state of conservation of medical plant in SASOL exploration area
and contribute to the establishment of conservation measures in each year highly industrialized distritrict.
Most popular medicine plant used by curandeiros in Inhambane Province
AVOCADO
Informer: Mr. Manique and METRAMO General Secretary deputy
in Maputo Mr. Chalice Abdala.
Popular: PERABACATA (Abacateiro, avocado). Scientific: Persea
americana C. Bauh, fam.: Lauráceas.
Application: aphrodisiac, general pain, diuretic (leaves of
abacateiro) and much more/perfect in the kitchen and better than
margarine, butter or jam.
Therapeutic indications: Diarrhea, dysentery, headache, contusion.
Complimentary information (Informer: Manique Eusebio done in
Xitswa and translated to Portuguese by Ercidio Nhatule).
The fruit (pulp) and the pit (seed) should be eaten fresh. The leaves can be used dry or as green tea. Avocado
leaf tea is a diuretic and carminative (eliminates intestinal gas) and helps the gallbladder releasing bile,
improving the digestion of fats.
Plate 116: Perabacata (avocado)
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
140
Please avoid taking large daily quantities of tea (more than 2 cups/day) because being diuretic can reduce a lot of the blood pressure in people who have this disease. Being diuretic also look for taking in the morning and at most until 5:00/6:00 pm. The pit (seed) roasted and grinded well thin
fighting diarrhea and dysentery.
The avocado pulp is considered an aphrodisiac. In the pit (seed) focuses the power to increase libido. The pulp can be eaten with honey or cane molasses (use bit) and recommend avoiding the use of any kind of sugar. Use honey! Can be mixed with “papinha de milo” (mamalyga?) and
other foods.
Don’t use avocado which grew in town or near the
roads. They are useless.
Buy from my plantation. Caution: the pulp is very rich (in calories? L.A.) and should be avoided by those who
try to lose weight. Already for athletes and our peasant is a good source of health energy, replacing with large
advantage the deadly and poisonous margarines and butters (Manique, pers. Com).
Africana potato (Hypoxis hemerocallidea) and Chibaba (pepper-bark tree) (Warburgia salutaris
(g. Bertol.) are among the most popular between curandeiros in Inhambane province as medicinal plants.
While in the first case, the harvest is intended to the large markets of medicinal plants, primarily in the province
of Maputo, Gaza and Inhambane (Krog et al., 2006: 14), in the second case, the neighboring South Africa is
frequently the destination (METRAMO, Maputo, Abdala, pers. Comm.). Cross-border trade via Mabote District
and demand in urban areas may, therefore, be a potential threat to these species by non-sustainable
consumption.
Chibaba
Popular: Chibaba (pepper-bark tree). Scientific name: Warburgia salutaris;
Application: Colds, flu and related diseases as rheumatism, malaria, venereal diseases, headache,
toothache, hemorrhoids and angina pectoris; and
Therapeutic indications: malaria and angina pectoris.
This is a tree that belongs to the family Canellaceae, usually with 5 to 10 m in height, occasionally reaching
the 20 m. The bark is brown. The leaves are simple, elliptical or lancelet, dark green and shiny on top and pale
on the page bottom, with spiral insert. The flowers are white or greenish. The fruit is a spherical berry. (Coates-
Palgrave, 2002: 741). The inner bark is spicy. and used for various applications especially these mentioned
above. Not all contacted curandeiros and METRAMO agree with therapeutically properties of this plant which
became rare in Inhassoro District and is imported from Gaza or Maputo (Rio Tembe, Massale e Goba Sede,
METRAMO and Rafo pers. Comm.). Plant should be classified as in risk (Critically Endangered).
Africana potato
Popular: Batata africana, batata preta. Scientific name: Hypoxis hemerocallidea.
This plant is perennial corms with elongated leaves. The flowers are star shaped and are yellow. Some authors
(Van Wyk et al., 1997: 156). Singh (2007: 360 p) points to the existence of 30 species in this genus in southern
Africa. These can be distinguished by size, shape and orientation of the size and shape of the leaves and
flowers (Van Wyk et al., 1997: 156) but each Curandeiro recognize and choose for treatment special specias
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
141
which is top secret for them. Corms have been used over many centuries by traditional medical practitioners
in the treatment of cancer and opportunistic infections associated with HIV/AIDS (Manique and METRAMO
pers. Com.).
More 17 name of plant were recorded in Inhassoro District and will be published after name correction and
bibliographic research as soon as possible.
Impact Assessment and Mitigation (Strategy of conservation)
Under this project, impact assessment and mitigation (strategy of conservation) of medical plants in SASOL MGTP project pass through the identification, quantification and collection of plant material in major areas of occurrence of these species, as well as the preliminary studies of the development of methods of vegetative propagation, given the difficulty of reproducing via seminal
Plate 117: Typical traditional farmacie in Inhambane Province.
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
142
APPENDIX A.6: INTERVIEWS
Mr. Tomas Eusebio, nephew of Palulane Miloiro Eusebio about medicine plants
“During childhood, not far from here in the village and without this today noisy road I saw my mother get leaves
from the yard to treat injuries results from household accidents or my brother’s wounds after football. And
often, they healed the injuries without having to resort to medical or pharmacy. In my uncle backyard (show
smiling with hand EN1 and around deserted field) grew up plant varieties whose usefulness no one in the
family knew. One day we decided to go to Manusse where supposed to be buried our ancestors. Stayin near
new constructed palhotas few meters from burial of my grand, grand father, my uncle asked local young lady
for permission to take a few sheets of one of the plants in her garden. She was very astonished but my uncle
explained to her and to me that that plant had the same utility that the ointment used for muscle pains), healed
pain anywhere in the body and could use to make hot steps in the wounds.
With this explanation, the plants gained new meaning in the region of Manusse and even far from here in other provinces. I have seen that plant was used many years until she starts to dry up mysteriously, having eventually disappeared from our backyard after Chinese and SASOL start explore the forest and build up the roads. Now, my uncle
import this plant from Gaza province”.
Do you know the name of this plant?
“Yes, but now I don’t remember It was 30 years ago! I think it is urera. Now AMETRAMO is invaded by immigrant from Western Africa and even from Brasil. Names change and
confuse.
I recently had a conversation with a lady who attends the same church. She complained of stomach aches
and said that a while ago there were many plants for the treatment of stomach problems, but don’t grow now.
All backyards are clean, become sandy and full of salt (?). No medicinal plant. If you wants to have some of
these plants, might have to go to distant places, and would be very costly. According of my uncle, there is
something that changed the climate; the rains fall outside of the season, followed by intense heat, destroying
the creation of God, will of our ancestors and as you are scientist, you can thing nature.
My grandmother repeatedly speaks that all problems is new habits of how we prepare food. There were times
we were using a lot the cacana to cure bile, clean blood and cure many diseases that affect children, and those
leaves could be plucked in the yard days after falling rain, but now not cacana around. Based on this
observation, conversation with my uncle and in many others occasion, it shows clearly that the disappearance
of medicinal plants, reflects negatively on the lives of women, mainly those who are mothers, because the
plants were used to cure various illnesses, domestic incidents without go far and extremely costly hospital”.
(Here some paragraph were deleted by L. A. as not connected to the main subject of research).
“The Curandeiros and knowledge of natural medicine allowed if spare time from doctors to treat serious
diseases and they also were given time to domestic duties. The worrying situation in this case is not just about
the disappearances of medicinal plants that hinders women's lives but also worried about the fact that there is
Plate 118: Mr. Tomas Eusebio, nephew of curandeiro Palulane building new clinic for his uncle
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
143
a lot of knowledge about medicinal plants and this not being recorded and researched by those who have the
power to just do it for the good of all. I am agronomist and I would like to study this year in Master course in
Maputo… waiting for news. May be they consider me to old. I am 41 years old but with very good practice in
the forest in Zambezia province (1998 – 2012). I don’t want stay here where foreigner are cutting our
forest…(text reduced by L. A.).
Many young people dies here. May be HIV/ADS, but with diagnose of malaria. I convers with my colleges and
neighbors suggesting go back to time of our ancestors, looking on of potentiation of plants, you could open a
space in neighborhoods, districts, so that anyone who has knowledge of the use of a plant to share his
knowledge”.
Thanks a lot. When you have time to visits burials of your ancestors in Manusse?
“When my uncle will be back home”
Catarina Cristina Alfredo
Date/Time January, 13, 2015 (2nd Interview)
Village Name Guvuro Nova Mambone
Interviewer Catarina Cristina Alfredo
Interviewee Leonardo Adamowicz
Position Director of the District Board of Culture Heritage
GPS point(s) with an estimate on site size
36K 711329 7678063
Were you born here? / How long have you lived here?
“I was born in small village now included to Zanave Natural Game Reserve. However due the war my
parents move to Volankulos where I have complete my priamary and Secondary School Eduardo
Mondlane. My university expierience in Beira were uncessesful. I became pregnant and my husbant was
transferred to Mambone as District Administrator Deputy of Guvuro. I have decided accept invitation to
finish 3 month course of culture heritage menagement in Inhambane and since 2009 I am working here”.
We are interested in the history of the village, do you know anything useful for us?
“If you have care we can this afternoon do together survey arround Mambone”.
OK. What is the origin/meaning of the village name?
“Name Mambone was given by Portuguese but Guvuro came from name of the river and why they call
river like that? I don’t know”.
Do you know how old this settlement is?
“As your professor told us we have here Early Iron Age archaeological site. C. 2000 years ? But he knows
better, ask your boss (smilling)”.
Are there any interesting stories any other settlements in the area?
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
144
“Most stories is about flood and lot about … but all this stories are connected with local superstition and
tribalism but our government fights these. How people become sick? Why we should not accept build houses
near cemeteries? Why we should not cross archaeological site during the night? This stories people speak
this years. In my repartition of local cultural heritage we recorded them, after came from province and they
comments as “stories not confirmed”. But local people here are in permanent movement due to floods, civil
war, and famine, seasonal migration to South Africa looking for job. As you see here are very few young men.
Most are children or old people”.
Graves/burial grounds
Are there any graves nearby? How many?
“We have two cemeteries. One cristin another one muslim. This one is badly destroyed by fluvial erosion and
“bad langueges” and stupid people produce rumors that river Save is against present of muslims in Mambone”.
Location of sites visited together with Mrs Catarina
1) Mambone 2, Archaeological Site, 36 K 711329 7678063;
2) Cemetery Old Mambone, 36 K 7677891 (During very short interview with local guardian was confirmed
that place is permanently under threat during flood that become very frequent);
3) Mosque, Old Mambone/Guvuro 36K 710909 7677940, constr. 1952, recently reconstructed (more
information see in report); and
4) Church, Old Mambone, 36K 710518 76778833, const. 5/9/1958 - December, 22, 1958 (More
information sees in report).
“The mosque and churche are presented in report. Mrs Catarino at the moment doesn’t present any information
about Sacred Places in district”.
Intangible Heritage
“Local festivities are associated with official national holidays (3 February, 25 Juny, 25 September), church
(Christmas, Easter, etc) or Ramadan. Some people organise special ceremonies associated with farming,
floods or fishing but they are ver sporadic events and no oficial record about. No records about specific taboos
only well knows such as separation of gender in mosque”.
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
145
Eugenio Sangue
Date/Time January, 14, 2015 (3rd Interviewer)
Village Name Mangarelane II (5 km before Regulo House)
Interviewer Eugenio Sangue
Interviewee
Ercidio Nhatule in Xitswa
Translation to Portuguese E. Nhatule
Translation to English Leonardo Adamowicz
Position Executive Secretary of Administration Post (as he introduce himself)
GPS point(s) with an
estimate on site size 36 K 726421 7602989
“I was born not far from here – in small village near the Lake Nhametunda to direction to ocean. After my 6
class I went with my uncle to South Africa. My uncle was very important person but Frelimo Secretary didn’t
like him. Now both have been died. We emigrate from here for 15 years. I came back when in South Africa
start “phobia” against foreigners. One of SASOL worker advises me to come back here.
Also my father and mother died and was buried in our village Nhametunda.
Villages here are very dispersed. They don’t preserve stories as in South Africa. Each family has its own history
but not villages. Today they settled here, five year later move or they are resettled.
Due general election I was appointed as Deputy of local Secretary of administrative post but it is not really job.
I would like work in SASOL, I speak Africans and can read and write in Portuguese. If not, in February I will go
back to South Africa. Time is very difficult here .I am married and father of one son in RSA and three children
here in Inhambane Province(?).
I don’t know the meaning of village names. Names are old - people rather new in this area.
When you come next time I can follow you and your white friend to my grandmother in Nhametunda. She is
75 years old or even more. She knows of stories and sacred, even secret places.
Most of young people work here in South Africa and when they came back, they don’t follow traditions of their
madalas (old parents).All foreigner investments are welcome.
Your questions are associated with our poverty. Please. Let’s go speak about gas, electricity, medical post
and schools.
I belong to Presbyterian Church, as most of as SA seasonal workers but I am not practice my believes. My
wife, she is catholic and she walks every Sunday to Mangarelane 1 or if they have lift to Inhassoro”.
Graves/burial grounds
“All of us Africans, we have two religions: European/Asiatic and local traditional. In the past graves are nearby
or even in abandoned houses but now administrations and churches recommend associate burials with their
Churches or communal cemeteries. I have never seen burials along the roads. May be Crosse commemorating
accidents? Regulo Paito in Mangarelane 1 will inform you much better. He knows where people now organize
Initiation rituals. I was circumcised near Nhamatunda Lake but all my children in hosin SA or Inhassoro.
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
146
About sacred places ask Regulo Paito. As him also why local administration licence cut sacred forest for people
from China. They look especially for strait, tall trees which grew only in sacred forest” (I suppose he refere to
Mogno Africano, coments Leonardo Adamowicz)
Intangible Heritage
Unique traditional festivities which I remember in this area were
Wedding parties;
Return from forest after Initiation Rituals;
Funeral rituals; and
Birth of first masculine descendent.
“Recently I have participated in one ceremony, with enormous quantity of tontonto (locally produced alcohol)
dedicated to ancestors asking them to help select the best governors in the general election”.
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
147
Paiva Jose
Date/Time January, 14, 2015 (4th Interviewer)
Village Name Mangarelane 1
Interviewer Paiva Jose
Interviewee Leonardo Adamowicz
Position Regulo, Chief of Local Community
GPS point(s) 36 K 732030 7602076
“I was born here, my father was born here, my grandfather
was born here, my children and my grandson was born here.
Only one person here is foreigner – this one, my 2nd wife.
She was born in Homoine and move here, as very young
girl, after massacre in their villa during civil war. Founder of
this village was father of my grandfather Mangarelane who
refuse render for Portuguese solders after defeats of
Ngungunhana.
I suppose that previously we speak Ma-changana but as our
ancestors women and mother speak Xitswa everybody start
prefer mother language.
In the beginning local people didn’t like as for this reason we
produce a lot of local beer to socialize with them.
Now we are one nation here but still we look for any opportunity to produce beer, tontonto or aguardente to
socialize. Unfortunately, villages now are not the same as before. Young people went to South Africa looking
for job, many was resettled or move to Vilankulos or Inhambane. New religious appears; new strange
Curandeiros from Mali, Malawi, Kenya open their “clinics”.
Sacred places? Most of sacred forest with toll trees mysteriously disappears. All ceremonies I conduct with
elders near my house.
Please take not on places where you can find Churches … Catholic, Methodist, Adventist, Universal in this
area (most of this places were identified and described in the report).
Figure 28. Regulo Paiva Jose house is political and spiritual center of Mangarelane 1
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
148
Graves/burial grounds
The burial of my ancestors are very far from here, near the
river on the top of small hill where in one chosen day of
December all my family is walking hours carrying food to
be offered to our ancestors. But not all members of family
are buried there/only masculine leaders. Other is buried
nearby village as you see there. We don’t need appoint
cemetery guardians. Dangerous cobras on such sites and
spirits of our ancestor are the best guardians of cemetery.
Are there burials along the roads? I don’t know. May be,
should be. If you see large tree, better baobab, you should
suppose that there is cemetery or important burial.
Nothing medicinal plant I can tell you but my mother is soecialist for traditional healing and cooperate with
many Curandeiros in area collecting them plants.
Paulo Vilanculos
Date / Time January, 16, 2015
Village Name Chipango 1
Interviewer Paulo Vilanculos
Interviewee Leonardo Adamowicz and Ercidio Nhatule
Position: Executive Regulo, former student of catholic university in Beira but for personal reason abandoned study
GPS point(s) with an estimate on site size
36 K 731039 7588818
“I was born here around Chipango. As you see my family name is Vilankulos as name of this district. We all
are from here. One part of our family stays near the ocean and they are fishmen. Other as me in hinterland
and we are agriculturist. When last Curandeiro, my uncle dies I continue very successfully with his clinic and
cooperate this rural health center in Chipango and Vilankulos.
We are very happy that SASOL invest in this area and care about our culture, religion and past. That is
excellent that your university send scientist for more research our history however last year visit us an
archaeologist or historian with very little knowledge of our region. My youngest brother, student at Eduardo
Mondlane Secondary School in Vilankulos was present during visit of this also very young consultant and ask
him about Chibuene and Manyikeni, sites already in school manuals and internet. Young consultant was very
confuse and tell that his area is history and not field archaeologist. Promise sends some photos but nothing
happened (As Mr. Paulo not mention any name of supposed consultant we have decided concentrate on the
actual research. Follow long discussion about archaeology of Vilankulos district between Prof. Leonardo
Adamowicz and Paulo Vilankulos who promise next time join team and together to record some sites which
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
149
he has seen and which should be confirmed. Photos of Chibuene, Manyikeni and other archaeological sites
was copied on CD with purpose to give for brother of Paulo to use during lessons of history in his school).
Now, if you have interest in burials, sacred places and churches you should follow this road to Vilanculos.
Don’t go from here to EN1 it is culturally deserted area. But the best sacred forest, lakes and old settlements
are located between Vilankulos and Massinga”.
Many indicated by Paulo Vilankulos churches and sacred places are located out of area planned by our present
survey.
“Now, I can tell you way I don’t like speak about burials, cemeteries and sacred places in this area. It is long
story but interesting experience for us local people. Some 20 years ago my father was visited by consultants
from Maputo asking about sacred places, burials, cemetery and he honestly indicate them all cultural richness
of our present and past. The consultant records all this sites on the map and after 1 years came to us
information that road will be build 11 km from here because our area is extremely important from cultural
heritage point of view and cannot be disturbed. Resident of this area are still upset with my father when they
should walk to bus or school 11 km”.
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
150
Santos Manuel Aguium
Date/Time June, 19 and 20, 2018
Village Name Mabime
Interviewer Santos Manuel Aguim
Interviewee Leonardo Adamowicz
Position
Cultural agent in District Board of Culture in Inhassoro and member of Circle of Interest of Cultural Heritage of the League of Scouts of Mozambique.
GPS point(s) 36 K 725667 7606208
Santos Manuel Aguim and his brother Marco were indicated as guide and assistents to archaeologival
survey in 19 and 20 of June 2018 by Natalia F. Chivambo, Director of District Board of Culture, Youth
and Technology (844233851, [email protected], [email protected]). During the
first day of survey (19/06/18) they assist to confirm location of sites recorded in 2014 and 2015 and
next day indicated 7 new sites:
1. Burial of Santos Aguium father, 21º 37´ 39.7´´ E35º 10´ 22.0´´ / 36 K 724898 7606809/ S21.62769
E35.17279 (BU 110); 2. Two burial of unknown family, S21 37 58.9 E35 10 49.1; /36 K 725667 7606208/ S21.63302 35.18030;
BU – 111; 3. One burial of unknown family, S21 42 03.8 E35 12 07.3 /36 K 727810 7598642/ S21.70105 E35.20204.
BU 112; 4. Cemetery, S21 37 58.3 E35 10 54.6; /36 K 725825 7606222/ S21.63287 E35.18182. CE-106;
5. Cemetery S21 41 26.3 E35 07 11.6 / 36 K 719326 7599913/ S21.69065 E35.11990; CE-107;Semi-
permanent catholic church, S21 37 50.4 E35 10 50.9; /36 K 725723 7606467/ S21.63059
E35.18080.CH-107; and
6. Semi-permanent catholic church 2 S21 41 30.4 E35 07 18.9 /36 K 719533 7599785/ S21.69178
E35.12192; CH-108
Final comments
a) More 7 interview was recorded in 2015 but without substantial information for this research;
b) Some Curandeiros refuse answer questions asking money for information for example: OK,
SASOL pay for your job you should pay for me!
c) Some indication done in interview was impossible to confirm.
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
APPENDIX B
Gazetteer of all sites
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
Site ID Site Type Description Location Coordinates (UTM 36K
or Lat, Long)
Date Valuation
AR-1 Archaeological Late Iron Age Pottery and Lithic Scatter Proposed data gathering well I-G6PX-6 Lat. 21° 42' 11.56'' S
Long. 035° 15' 45.6'' E Late Iron Age LOW - MEDIUM
AR-2 Archaeological Late Iron Age Pottery Scatter Proposed well pad I-G6PX-4 Lat. 21 46’36.5’’S
Long. 035 15’.05’’E Late Iron Age LOW - MEDIUM
AR-3 Archaeological Early Iron Age Pottery Scatter and Shells Existing pad I-14 Lat. 21°38 '32.8'' S
Long. 035°11'50.3'' E Early Iron Age LOW - MEDIUM
AR-4 Archaeological Late Stone Age Lithics 1 km south of proposed flowline Lat. 21° 43' 57.5'' S
Long. 035° 07' 18.5'' E Late Iron Age LOW - MEDIUM
AR-5 Archaeological Late Iron Age Shell Midden Proposed well pad I-G6PX-2 Lat. 21° 39' 23.0'' S
Long. 035° 13' 29.6'' E Late Iron Age LOW
AR-101 Archaeological Mambone 2 - Archaeological Site, disturbed by river Save
erosion. Field survey completed.
c80 km north of Vilankulos, Inhambane. Mouth of the Save
River.
- Early – Late Iron Age HIGH
AR-102 Archaeological Mambone 1 - Archaeological almost totally disturbed by
fluvial erosion. Interview with Cristina Alfredo.
c80 km north of Vilankulos, Inhambane. Mouth of the Save
River.
- Early – Late Iron Age LOW
AR-103 Archaeological Settlement site. Archaeological site. Late Iron Age. Along route for transportation of equipment 716719, 7601505 Late Iron Age MEDIUM
AR-104 Archaeological Settlement site. Late Iron Age. Dispersed pottery Luangwa
Tradition. Site disturbed by practice of agriculture and
erosion. Systematic field survey.
c30 km west of powerline
706262, 7596848 Late Iron Age
LOW
AR-105 Archaeological Small area with high concentration of Luangwa Tradition
Pottery and iron slag.
Adjacent to route for transportation of equipment 716126, 7598079 Late Iron Age
MEDIUM
AR-106 Archaeological Chibuene. Coastal trading settlement with artefacts, such as
glass beads, evidencing trade links across the Indian Ocean.
Pottery with shell stamp motifs. Tentative World Heritage
Site.
c6 km south of Vilankulos, Inhambane. - 6th-13th centuries HIGH
AR-107 Archaeological Nhachengue. Archaeological Site, evidence of Gokomere-
Ziwa ceramic tradition
Nhanchengue, Inhambane. - Unknown HIGH
AR-108 Archaeological Archaeological site. Late Iron Age. Stone walls. Zimbabwe
Tradition.
c100 km north of Vilankulos, Inhambane. - Late Iron Age HIGH
AR-109 Archaeological Few quartz microlith and Late Iron Age pottery. Site covered
by high grass and partially disturbed by agriculture.
c9 km east of Mapanzene 735064, 7594151 Late Stone Age?
LOW
AR-110 Archaeological Late Iron Age Archaeological Site. Luangwa Tradition
decorated pottery. Disturbed by agriculture.
South eastern extent of study area 737374, 7567975 Late Iron Age
LOW
AR-111 Archaeological Archaeological site. ?Early and Late Iron Age. c 5 km south east of Manusse 708393, 7583982 Early and Late Iron Age MEDIUM
AR-112 Archaeological Archaeological site. Late Iron Age. c 5 km north of route for transportation of equipment 723071, 7600815 Late Iron Age LOW
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
Site ID Site Type Description Location Coordinates (UTM 36K
or Lat, Long)
Date Valuation
AR-113 Archaeological Manyikeni. Madzimbabwe. Open Air Museum. Stone wall.
Zimbabwe Tradition. Tentative World Heritage Site.
c52 km north of Vilankulos, beyond study area. - 1170±80 - 1610±70
(AD)
HIGH
AR-114 Archaeological Archaeological site. Late Iron Age. Limited archaeological
evidence and shallow shell midden.
c11 km north east of Mapanzene. 736093, 7595224 Late Iron Age
LOW
AR-115 Archaeological Archaeological Site. Late Iron Age. Recorded in 2000, entirely
disturbed by agriculture. Field survey.
c.2 km north of beach landing option at Maritima 726481, 7619521 Late Iron Age
LOW
BU-101 Cultural and
Religious
Burial, Sacred Place, claim by nephew of Pululane Milioro
António as Sacred Place and burial of his ancestor. Nothing
visible.
Manusse 708107, 7583993 - HIGH
BU-102 Religious No visible burial. White cotton sheet indicate area of
cemetery. Interview Guardian and local people. Survey
undertaken.
On the way to Mabime. 726334, 7597963
- HIGH
BU-103 Religious Burial of the founder of Chipongo in the end of 19 c. AD. No
visible archaeological evidence.
Chipongo 733919, 7589938
- HIGH
BU-104 Religious Only two burials are visible. Grass very high. Lot of cobras
which are considered protector of ancestors. Interview with
local women.
Mangarelane 732758, 7601174 - HIGH
BU-105 Religious One grave. Identified by Sasol clearance team. Manusse, 15m east of powerline servitude. -21.804111, 35.036528
- HIGH
BU-106 Religious One grave. Identified by Sasol clearance team. Manusse, 30m west of powerline servitude. -21.812833, 35.033000
- HIGH
BU-107 Religious Two graves. Identified by Sasol clearance team. Burial, 15 m east of powerline servitude. -21.896944, 35.071611
- HIGH
BU-108 Religious Two graves. Identified by Sasol clearance team. Burial -21.898000, 35.071583
- HIGH
BU-109 Religious One grave. Identified by Sasol clearance team. Burial, 3m east of powerline servitude -21.948611, 35.100333 - HIGH
BU - 110 Religious The grave of Santos´ Mabime family (father). Identified by
archaeological team during survey 19/06/18.
Mangarelane II
-21.62769 35.17279
724897, 7606809 - HIGH
BU - 111 Religious Two graves. Unknown family. Identified by archaeological
team during survey 19/06/18
Mangarelane II
-21.63302 35.18030
725666, 7606208 - HIGH
BU - 112 Religious One grave. Unknown family. Identified by archaeological
team during survey 19/06/18
Mabime
-21.70105 35.20204
727810, 7598642 - HIGH
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
Site ID Site Type Description Location Coordinates (UTM 36K
or Lat, Long)
Date Valuation
CE-101 Religious Partially destroyed by River Save. Interview with guardian
and a local.
Old Mambone 710066, 7677891
- HIGH
CE-102 Religious Cemetery for people from Nhamanhcea two generations ago.
Interview with some people/Survey
Nhamanhcea 731614, 7589086
- HIGH
CE-103 Cultural and
Religious
Sacred Place, probably with burials. Some recent potsherd
found
Malongojiva 722872, 7601191
- HIGH
CE-104 Religious Five graves. Identified by Sasol clearance team Cemetery -21.864917, 35.052833 - HIGH
CE-105 Religious Three graves. Identified by Sasol clearance team. Traditional
ceremony carried out.
Cemetery -21.884861, 35.064111
- HIGH
CE - 106 Religious Cemetery. Five graves. Identified by archaeological team
during survey 19/06/18.
Mangarelane II 725825 7606222 725825, 7606222 - HIGH
CE - 107 Religious Cemetery. Seven graves. Identified by archaeological team
during survey 19/06/18.
Mabime
719326 7599913
719326, 7599913 - HIGH
CH-101 Religious Remarkable architecture. Needs to be renovated. Interview
with Cristina Alfredo. Guardian with local nearby cemetery.
Mambone 710518, 76778833
- MEDIUM
CH-102 Religious Evangelical Church Guardian with local nearby cemetery Jofane, along transportation route 714664, 7612121
- LOW
CH-103 Religious Apostolic Church, Assembleia de Deus. Guardian with local
nearby cemetery.
Chipongo 731389, 7589159
- LOW
CH-104 Religious Church Apostol's with rustic original architecture. Apostolic Church 716789, 7580422
- LOW
CH-105 Religious Methodist Church in need of renovation. Interview with priest.
Guardian with local nearby cemetery.
Methodist Church 731957, 7602292 - LOW
CH-106 Religious Church St. Ana and professional school for boys and girls.
Field Survey, Interview
M.C.St. Ana, along transportation route 716638, 7601677
- MEDIUM
CH - 107 Religious Catholic church of St. José (semi-permanent) with build with
rudumental material. Identified by archaeological team during
survey 19/06/18.
Mangarelane II 725723 7606467 725723, 7606467 - LOW
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
Site ID Site Type Description Location Coordinates (UTM 36K
or Lat, Long)
Date Valuation
CH - 108 Religious Catholic church (semi-permanent) with build with rudumental
material. Identified by archaeological team during survey
19/06/18
Mabime
719509 7599787
719509, 7599787 - LOW
MO-101 Religious Mosque. General information and visit. Guardian with local
nearby cemetery.
Old Mambone / Guvuro 710909, 7677940 - LOW
MP-101 Cultural Medicinal site - interview with Curandeiro nephew.
Curandeiro himself went to forest to look for natural medicine.
Interview completed.
North of Maimelane, along transportation route
716407, 7613312
- LOW
MP-102 Cultural Medicinal site - Traditional Doctor Recently open practice.
Medicine is not based on plants, almost all are shells or clays.
Temane 716612, 7605310
- MEDIUM
MP-103 Cultural Medicinal site - Traditional Doctor Manique Eusébio was born
in Malawi but family is from Inhambane province. Interview
completed.
Litlau, along transportation route
716427, 7600269
- HIGH
SP-101 Cultural Sacred Place. Field Survey Lago Sangene. 15 km north of study area 694159, 7635550
- HIGH
SP-102 Cultural Sacred Place. Centro de Reavivamento Espiritual. Field
survey. Interview completed.
8 km west of Inhassoro, along transportation route 720470, 7615047
- LOW
SP-103 Cultural Sacred Place - circumcision. Where skins are buried. Field
Survey and interview with local young men recently
circumcised done by Ercidio Nhatule in Xitswa
Mangarelane I 732758, 7601394 - HIGH
SP-104 Cultural Sacred Place. Dialog with some women. Bathing in the
Pecane Lake help pregnant women have healthy child.
Pecane, south eastern boundary of study area. 737921, 7567790
- HIGH
SP-105 Cultural and
Religious
Considered by local people as Sacred Place but not
supported by church. Old cemetery?
Maimelane, along transportation route 716489, 7601678
- HIGH
SP-106 Cultural Paulo Vilankulos, artist, community leader, traditional doctor.
Interview completed.
Chipongo 733919, 7589938
- HIGH
SP-107 Cultural and
Religious
Sacred Place (5), probably burial of community leaders. Chipongo 731770, 7588865 - HIGH
CE-01 Cultural Cemetery Mangarelane 734478, 7603138 - HIGH
CE-02 Cultural Cemetery Mangarelane 734330, 7603633 - HIGH
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
Site ID Site Type Description Location Coordinates (UTM 36K
or Lat, Long)
Date Valuation
CE-03 Cultural Cemetery Chipongo 732974, 7589209 - HIGH
CE-04 Cultural Cemetery Chipongo 732825, 7588662 - HIGH
CE-05 Cultural Cemetery Chipongo 733139, 7587978 - HIGH
CE-06 Cultural Cemetery Chipongo 733719, 7588007 - HIGH
CE-07 Cultural Cemetery Mapanzene 733230, 7592899 - HIGH
CE-08 Cultural Cemetery Mapanzene 733160, 7593277 - HIGH
CE-09 Cultural Cemetery Mapanzene 732402, 7593354 - HIGH
CE-10 Cultural Cemetery Mapanzene 732041, 7592881 - HIGH
CE-11 Cultural Cemetery Mapanzene 725792, 7592814 - HIGH
CE-12 Cultural Cemetery Mapanzene 731677, 7592885 - HIGH
CE-13 Cultural Cemetery Mabime 721200, 7600186 - HIGH
CE-14 Cultural Cemetery Mabime 725565, 7599230 - HIGH
CE-15 Cultural Cemetery Mabime 724198, 7600534 - HIGH
CE-16 Cultural Cemetery Mabime 727608, 7599092 - HIGH
CE-17 Cultural Cemetery Mabime 723404, 7597034 - HIGH
CE-18 Cultural Cemetery Mabime 723575, 7599758 - HIGH
CE-19 Cultural Cemetery Mangugumete 716984, 7595175 - HIGH
CE-20 Cultural Cemetery Mangugumete 716702, 7595498 - HIGH
CE-21 Cultural Cemetery Mangugumete 717402, 7596460 - HIGH
CE-22 Cultural Cemetery Manusse 707270, 7587243 - HIGH
April 2019 18103533-321152-20
Site ID Site Type Description Location Coordinates (UTM 36K
or Lat, Long)
Date Valuation
CE-23 Cultural Cemetery Manusse 707695, 7586374 - HIGH
CE-24 Cultural Cemetery Manusse 705814, 7586619 - HIGH
CE-25 Cultural Cemetery Chitsotso 717735, 7593310 - HIGH
CE-26 Cultural Cemetery Chitsotso 717808, 7591806 - HIGH
SF-01 Cultural Sacred Forest, surrounding Sacred Tree (ST-02) Mabime -21.691817, 35.15785 - HIGH
SF-02 Cultural Sacred Forest contains cemetery (CE-21) Mangugumete -21.722067, 35.098533 - HIGH
SF-03 Cultural Sacred Forest Manusse -21.798517, 35.005683 - HIGH
SF-04 Cultural Sacred Forest, contains cemetery (CE-25) Chitsotso -21.752, 35.1031 - HIGH
SF-05 Cultural Sacred Forest Mapenzene -21.695083, 35.162817 - HIGH
SP-01 Cultural Sacred Pool Mabime -21.691817, 35.15785 - HIGH
ST-01 Cultural Sacred Tree - Baobab Tree Mangarelane -21.6557, 35.259383 - HIGH
ST-02 Cultural Sacred Tree - 'Massaleira', burial site of first King, within
Sacred Forest (SF-01)
Mabime -21.691817, 35.15785 - HIGH
ST-03 Cultural Sacred Tree Manusse -21.798517, 35.005683 - HIGH
ST-04 Cultural Sacred Tree Chitsotso -21.752, 35.1031 - HIGH
MP-01 Cultural Medicinal Plants Mabime - - MEDIUM
MP-02 Cultural Medicinal Plants Mapanzene - - MEDIUM
MP-03 Cultural Medicinal Plants Chipongo - - MEDIUM
N/A Cultural All Churches All Villages - - LOW
golder.com
